TEST01 London with 1.05 patch spotted tonight

[dporter]

That and stuck with a controller and the aim help.

Aim help

Not when I play. It's actually harder to aim on the controller. Some of you treat us like lepers on here if we play on both the pc and console. My vested interest in ghost recon on the pc is just as strong as everyone else's.

(sorry re-read my thread. Not saying you Roco treat console players that way. I'm saying I've seen other comments that come off that way. I was just replying to your aim comment. Sorry, it just sounded like I was accusing Roco of that behavior and wanted to clarify.)

Edited December 10, 2007 by dporter

[Hipshot]

Hmm, coop_retrieve, could that be a custom mission4 [GR]?

[Papa6]

I'm moving away from GRAW2 and enjoying Crysis singleplayer only. MP is same ol same ol.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

That and stuck with a controller and the aim help.

Aim help

Not when I play. It's actually harder to aim on the controller. Some of you treat us like lepers on here if we play on both the pc and console. My vested interest in ghost recon on the pc is just as strong as everyone else's.

(sorry re-read my thread. Not saying you Roco treat console players that way. I'm saying I've seen other comments that come off that way. I was just replying to your aim comment. Sorry, it just sounded like I was accusing Roco of that behavior and wanted to clarify.)

I'm not sure about GRAW2 but in some games the consoles get an easier aim to help them out since they are using controllers. I figured with GRAW2 it would be the same.

[The Blueberry_EBDA]

MS released a mission pack for Flight Simulator X this year called Acceleration. They rarely release mission packs for FS, so that should tell you much. MS also supports modders for FS (unlike they do for their XBox X360 games). You need to research what you wish to talk about before spouting off. MS wants to push the PC as a gaming platform just as much as the their console as evidenced by the Games For Windows iniative they started and many games now are part of (though not all games meet the Games For Windows Live portion as that is an optional feature).

OOOOHHHPPP.Got it too.I also have AGE of Empires 3 and all its expansions.I also have UBIS Silenthunter wolves of the Pacific.Spouting OFF is fun.Flight sims are dominated by PC folks anyway.Some games dont translate good to the box.From some of the things ive read in tech articals from people,Id say that my staytment still stands.It aint all going away soon.Not yet anyway.But.Look at the store shelves.There throwing us some bones.allbeit better than UBI has.

[ARUJackal]

Silent hunter 4 is a remake of Silent service by microprose (amiga days http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Service_(video_game) ) all be it better graphically. And looking back... Silent Service didn't need patching lol.

My, how games have changed now that patching is the official excuse for companies to sell games early. "Get it out and we can patch it later!". Well thats what it feels like these days anyway. But even consoles are going to go the same way, with internet connection comes patching. Give it a few years (or less) and their forums will look like ours, "Is there a patch coming soon?" instead of "oh more download content yiiipppeee". Still thats the way it's going and I don't believe there is a way to stop it. If a game can be made for more than the PC or console alone then it will be, and both shall have it. Trouble is the game is usually made up to the PC from the console version as far as I can tell (or at least the blue print of it). PC's are better than that and deserve the extra push needed to make the game a PC game in its own right. Just remember, once it was PC's that got the extras, not the consoles.

You may feel I am against patching, no I am not against it. It is a necessity these days due to 1000's of PC's out there all being different. What I am against is half finished games with the patching excuse, followed by "when the hell is the patch coming out then?" due to NO ONE saying. It's just plain rude of the companies to do that. Especially when they can see that we want to know, you know, THE CUSTOMERS.

(throws his penny in the well)

Jack

Edited December 10, 2007 by ARUJackal

[Papa6]

what I've noticed after i realized that devs/publishers could care less about their customers, that they develop games to be like movies.

You pay your admission, in this case the price of the game

you get your game and can have perhaps a few REAL hours of enjoyment..getting you excited

then get you to buy the next sequel...bugs and all.

(*literal sarcasm*no sense in patching a game, the next sequel is already in development!!!)

so you buy a game that gives you a few hours of pure enjoyment, then you look to buy the next version.

GRAW2 was never meant to be a lasting title. nothing hints at this better than the mod tools and the support from ubisoft.

back on topic: so.. is there a patch 1.05? who knows? but would anyone care seeing how numbers of people left greener pastures?

[ROCO*AFZ*]

what I've noticed after i realized that devs/publishers could care less about their customers, that they develop games to be like movies.

You pay your admission, in this case the price of the game

you get your game and can have perhaps a few REAL hours of enjoyment..getting you excited

then get you to buy the next sequel...bugs and all.

(*literal sarcasm*no sense in patching a game, the next sequel is already in development!!!)

so you buy a game that gives you a few hours of pure enjoyment, then you look to buy the next version.

GRAW2 was never meant to be a lasting title. nothing hints at this better than the mod tools and the support from ubisoft.

back on topic: so.. is there a patch 1.05? who knows? but would anyone care seeing how numbers of people left greener pastures?

But thatis the thing.. is there something better?

[Papa6]

well to answer your question with a question? is GRAW2 the best on the market

(please note titles like bioshock, halo3..) this game is about 6 months old(GRAW2) and just smoldering embers in a campfire, not being sarcastic either..

Edited December 11, 2007 by Papa6

[ROCO*AFZ*]

See that is the thing. For the tactical gamer, there isn't any. Your choices are America's army, arma and GRAW2.

The problem is the masses are kids that just like to run and shoot and not value there computer soldier's life.

We are a dieing breed. so there isn't much done to appease us as we are a small portion of the overall market.

That is why games like Halo, Quake the whole series, COD4 and such thrive. Mindless run, shoot and die with twitchy reflexes. No thought, no communication needed (as the action is to loud and there is no coordinates nor maps)

[mwgfghost]

Kinda the same with BF 2142. People were really just waiting to get promoted as opposed to living and staying alive. What games should have are awards for high kill per death ratios. That's what I liked about 2142 is it gave an award for every 5-10 straight kills. But that game was more all out battles instead of small unit tactics. I like both games but GRAW 2 took a step back in my opinion and I'm glad you don't have to watch the insertions in COOP. But I think this is getting off topic so again I have to wonder whether there's really an actual patch or not. And if so I'd really like to know what it has to offer instead of just keeping it a secret. You'd think they'd be close in releasing it if they've begun testing it online. But I have bigger things to worry about like my Arabic final.

[petsfed]

See that is the thing. For the tactical gamer, there isn't any. Your choices are America's army, arma and GRAW2.

The problem is the masses are kids that just like to run and shoot and not value there computer soldier's life.

We are a dieing breed. so there isn't much done to appease us as we are a small portion of the overall market.

That is why games like Halo, Quake the whole series, COD4 and such thrive. Mindless run, shoot and die with twitchy reflexes. No thought, no communication needed (as the action is to loud and there is no coordinates nor maps)

I've been thinking about this, and since its not actually our own skin, its quite a bit harder to force players into tactical thinking without making the game ludicrously contrived or so boring as to be unenjoyable. I mean honestly, when you die in a game, you reload to your last save point, or maybe the beginning of the level. You die in the real world, that's it. So tactics that are effective in the real world are not as effective in game world because you get multiple chances to make it through correctly. Sure, you can eventually learn the tactics, but all the game designer/online opponent has to do is change their tactics to make up for it. Counterstrike tactics are as they are because of the way that reality works. Its more than a little silly to expect that real-world tactics will translate well (if at all) into the digital realm. You want to play realistically? If you die, even once, you uninstall the game and never return to it. Anything less is being unrealistic. Seem stupid? Absolutely, but that's realism for you, and why real world tactics can never catch on to the degree that you want to in the digital realm. You wanna rail against something, don't rail against the way people play, rail against how they put winning above immersion because that forces them into playing in a way you don't like.

I'm used to "purity" arguments in a few of my other hobbies, and it comes down to this: you are no better and no worse than anyone else for preferring your sandbox. So long as your actions don't impact their experience, you're ok. So long as their actions don't impact your experience, you have no room to complain (which leaves the door wide open for criticizing certain companies for catering to the lowest common denominator).

[Nutlink]

See that is the thing. For the tactical gamer, there isn't any. Your choices are America's army, arma and GRAW2.

The problem is the masses are kids that just like to run and shoot and not value there computer soldier's life.

We are a dieing breed. so there isn't much done to appease us as we are a small portion of the overall market.

That is why games like Halo, Quake the whole series, COD4 and such thrive. Mindless run, shoot and die with twitchy reflexes. No thought, no communication needed (as the action is to loud and there is no coordinates nor maps)

And that's how GRAW 2 feels to a lot of us too. Remember how slow paced GR1 and the Rainbow Six games were in SP and coop? Now it's run, kill, die, run further, kill more, die again, repeat. MP doesn't have much value due to imbalances in the game (like perfectly steady sniping and rocket launcher style GLs that don't need to use any sights), difficulty of mapping (leaving us with the same boring stock maps), things like that. Honestly I'm surprised jumping wasn't introduced into the game.

[GRIN_Wolfsong]

difficulty of mapping (leaving us with the same boring stock maps)

I'm surprised this is still listed as an issue. It's not like it took no time to make maps for GR1. We had access to 0% of the original map parts, as everything was built into the maps and no loose props where used. Everything EVERYTHING had to be done in 3DS Max, once again because everything was built into the map. Still there came new maps, but the wait was loooooong.

It took over a year before we even saw a working custom map that actually worked well for GR1, it took that long for people to get the hang of it. What makes people think it will be easier now? With the vertex count being higher, the texture resolution being higher, basically everything being higher or more detailed in some way. So even though people may be more accustomed to 3D software and modeling today, it still takes a lot of time to jump to the next platform of quality. Developers go through he same thing.

Difficulty of scripting leaving the community with the same stock missions may be another issue (besides the MP game mode stuff that is already done and only needs zones), but mapping is not harder then in GR1.

That is my opinion as a long time GR1 modder.

[version2]

ummm... so what happened to this so called new patch?

this year? 2008? 09? never?

[Forrester]

ask UBI

[mwgfghost]

La tahrifoom.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

See that is the thing. For the tactical gamer, there isn't any. Your choices are America's army, arma and GRAW2.

The problem is the masses are kids that just like to run and shoot and not value there computer soldier's life.

We are a dieing breed. so there isn't much done to appease us as we are a small portion of the overall market.

That is why games like Halo, Quake the whole series, COD4 and such thrive. Mindless run, shoot and die with twitchy reflexes. No thought, no communication needed (as the action is to loud and there is no coordinates nor maps)

And that's how GRAW 2 feels to a lot of us too. Remember how slow paced GR1 and the Rainbow Six games were in SP and coop? Now it's run, kill, die, run further, kill more, die again, repeat. MP doesn't have much value due to imbalances in the game (like perfectly steady sniping and rocket launcher style GLs that don't need to use any sights), difficulty of mapping (leaving us with the same boring stock maps), things like that. Honestly I'm surprised jumping wasn't introduced into the game.

In gr1 i didn't play co-op except a few missions we made for kicks and gametypes like AFZFORCE that made the enemy way harder. I also don't play SP past usually the 1st mission. I like to play against humans. Maybe that is why GRAW2 doesn't wear on me. Every time you play a map, you play against new people with new tactics. Gr1 was the same way for me. GRAW1 was good but eventually because of the loadout, we all used the same kits pretty much. In Graw 2 i see more weapons being used of all classes. I can even own on support with the right map. Our team has always been about competitive play rather in a ladders or tourns. sadly enough there isn't many of them anymore the the gamespy ladder thing never was explained nor never worked right.

When i play a GRAW 2 match, just as in GR1, the anticipation is there. The communicaltion is there (thanks for Grids also Grin) and i am fully immersed. I don't get that out of other games. I miss the quiet as you set up with your guys and move in with a prefdifined plan that you worked out for the match. I miss the sound of a nade lightly tossed over a rock, giving me only 2nds to get out of the way. and in GR1 i miss the injurys. The above all but the last one can also be found in GRAW2.

What the patch won't bring back though is the ladders. TWL had a decent one for a bit but now has no admin and teams are dropping like flys. It should however bring back the public servers for at least a few months.

[Guarnere]

Fine tunning and adjustments are good and all but I just want some new maps

Edited December 11, 2007 by Guarnere

[Papa6]

What gets me is, alot pretty much agree that UBISOFT is in it for the money..ok...just how? [GR] sold alot of copies.

That one PC game, irregardless of how old or dated it is, setup up the franchise up to today. WITHOUT [GR], this whole franchise wouldn't EVEN exist. So, we can throw the money idea out the window.

the long and the short. What has happened is, the original creators of [GR] have moved on and someone new has taken over the supposed creativity side. In order for a game to be labelled "Tactical" they should be tested by actual military soldiers in beta testing then, be confirmed as "tactical". I'm so ###### at how everyone says, eww, title such and such, the tactical game of the year! it's another over used word that's over used and destroyed. most shooters are just glorified "couch soldier" style games. some kid who "thinks" the GRAW/GRAW2 games are tastical because of some cross com crap on the screen are just disillusioned(sp?).

GRAW2 was an attempt to try and make a game that, while it looked tactical, is just a game with a pretty screen graphics and cross com. futuristic uniforms, weapons but no tactical gameplay. now, some may say, "well it's for the kids." then I say, let them play WARROCK, or some other FPS.

I would laugh so hard if this wasn't a tactic that EA uses since it bought into Ubisoft. If, UBI craps out, then EA would SURELY aquire(buy) UBISOFT. That would bode terribly as well. EA hasn't built a single game that is tactical, just MMP online shooters.

This just leaves us with Ground Branch. Sorry kids, this is a game for pure adults, military and police force folks looking for that tactical gameplay.

Tactical games..R.I.P!

[ROCO*AFZ*]

What gets me is, alot pretty much agree that UBISOFT is in it for the money..ok...just how? [GR] sold alot of copies.

That one PC game, irregardless of how old or dated it is, setup up the franchise up to today. WITHOUT [GR], this whole franchise wouldn't EVEN exist. So, we can throw the money idea out the window.

the long and the short. What has happened is, the original creators of [GR] have moved on and someone new has taken over the supposed creativity side. In order for a game to be labelled "Tactical" they should be tested by actual military soldiers in beta testing then, be confirmed as "tactical". I'm so ###### at how everyone says, eww, title such and such, the tactical game of the year! it's another over used word that's over used and destroyed. most shooters are just glorified "couch soldier" style games. some kid who "thinks" the GRAW/GRAW2 games are tastical because of some cross com crap on the screen are just disillusioned(sp?).

GRAW2 was an attempt to try and make a game that, while it looked tactical, is just a game with a pretty screen graphics and cross com. futuristic uniforms, weapons but no tactical gameplay. now, some may say, "well it's for the kids." then I say, let them play WARROCK, or some other FPS.

I would laugh so hard if this wasn't a tactic that EA uses since it bought into Ubisoft. If, UBI craps out, then EA would SURELY aquire(buy) UBISOFT. That would bode terribly as well. EA hasn't built a single game that is tactical, just MMP online shooters.

This just leaves us with Ground Branch. Sorry kids, this is a game for pure adults, military and police force folks looking for that tactical gameplay.

Tactical games..R.I.P!

Have you ever seen the total sales for GR1? was it GR1, GR1 with expansion desert seige, GR1 with expansion DS and IT? or gold series?

Note what i am posting. Expansions add to the total amount sold. People will rebuy the original if they didn't get it the 1st time when an expansion is released.

[ARUJackal]

How can you say a game can only be named "Tactical" if the army are involved? Tactical means planning and ability to change that plan on the fly. Which all the Ghost recon games can do. One of the first games you could actually pull up the combat map (satallite view) and place your team where you like. The ability to the give orders, cover, attack, reform, they are all tactical moves.

Like someone said earlier in this thread there are not many games out there to choose from that have this type of COOP [GR]. Yeah you can play BF2 but take a step back and watch and you will soon see its a free for all on the servers. Unless your in a clan game there is no tactics in play there. Run, shoot, die, spawn, die. I have been on 32 slot servers where only 2 squads were made, the rest totally ran about like headless chickens. Fun for a while, yeah but soon it starts to wear off. Un-installed and packed away.

Only 2 games have given me the teamwork fun factor. GR series and SWAT 4. That why I hope that this patch sorts things out that need sorting.

Ability to select and give orders to human players in the team. Multi coop.

Spawn on the leader.

Select your own equipment (like GRAW) not classes.

Playing coop is what I like but most upcoming games forget to add that mode. MoH Airborne dropped it at the last minute. Thats a big shame.

(throws another penny down the well)

Jack

[GRIN_Wolfsong]

Only 2 games have given me the teamwork fun factor. GR series and SWAT 4.

Did you miss SWAT3 and Rogue Spear (the last really good R6 game)?

[mwgfghost]

Who said anything about a game being tactical if the Army is involved? Also why wouldn't it be? I think this game is somewhat tactical but it's a little too much responsibilty for 4 guys to handle. Anyways, I wonder how that "patch" is coming along.

[JJUK]

Who said anything about a game being tactical if the Army is involved? Also why wouldn't it be? I think this game is somewhat tactical but it's a little too much responsibilty for 4 guys to handle. Anyways, I wonder how that "patch" is coming along.

Poor i understand it has gone back for more fixes