What's Your Assesment Of The Core Reasonss For Graw2's Mp Exod

[Poita]

I'm really enjoying my blast through the single player campaign of GRAW 2. Apart from anytying else, its the most rich 'game sounds' expeirence I've ever had. I swear that on Sierra when trying to cross over the bridge and being pinned down i could not only hear the amazing sound of rounds hitting the side of the van i was using for cover but that as each rapid, sucessive round distorted the panneling of the doors the next round had a progressivly warped twang as it hit; amazing to hear the gradually morphing sound.

Sure GRAW 2 is no [GR] but I'd say for all its faults it is the closest thing there is.

Aaaaanyway. I am curious as to what you guys think on this. [GR] had a really long and active MP life. I mean, when did it start to seriously tail off? 2005? So that's a healthy four year span. That's pretty amazing. So what would you list as some of the core reasons that GRAW2 didn't have the same rabid following, activity and longevity in it's capacity as an MP TDM/Clan match scene.

I'm not just trying to provide a way of slagging GRAW2's weak points here, there's been enough of that since release. I'm just interested in what some other players see as the missing magic that prevented GRAW2 from achieving the seminal status that [GR] did in its very long day.

[BSR_Vhladd]

Wow, this could take up volumes.......

To touch on a few things.....by the time GRAW2 hit, it was evident that UBI had dumbed down the game. Granted, it had some things going for it, but what made GR great and unique had now been removed. No gimp, lack of squads, no Direct IP, no Automap downloads, a brutally bad editor, no replays, after action lobby not community friendly, etc., etc. The list could go on for quite a while.

Not to mention UBI games have continuously gone the path of console fast twitch shooters without realism. I'm not saying that's bad, just not the game GR was. Also, by the time any mods started coming out for GRAW2 - the already small community of ex-GR players had basically exited and no way to bring them back. I put together a mod for GRAW2 where I brought GRAW2 as close as it could get to the [GR] white knuckle intensity......but, to no avail. The damage had already been done.

[Poita]

Most of those things are certainly a factor but what about actual gameplay?

Also, what mod was that? Is it in the download section? I'd be intrested in checking it out.

[AJ59]

There are also some bugs that never got fixed... like the rate of fire bug... Rather annoying to have your assault rifle stuck on auto-fire when you want single shot.

And the game still has a lot of crashes in MP. Not a whole lot.. but enough to make it darned annoying.

What I find puzzling is that there are a LOT more people making new maps and missions for GRAW1. Not sure why that is... maybe its easier?

I do agree with you about the sounds. Playing this game with a high quality surround system is a true joy.

[Rocky]

Also, what mod was that? Is it in the download section? I'd be intrested in checking it out.

It's linked in his post.

[krise madsen]

I would say that the core reason is a fundamental lack of understanding of the issues with a realistic tactical shooter on behalf of Ubi/GRIN. It was designed as "a first person shooter, with realism" which was sort of a recipe for disaster. They just didn't understand the basic issues the way the old RSE did. You can call that a blatant personal attack if you want, but I really don't blame GRIN for being hacks, lazy or any such nonsense. Their work from GRAW1 to GRAW2 proved that they are competent and capable game developers. They just don't quite get the tactical shooter. But then again, most developers don't.

Respectfully

krise maden

[Poita]

Oh yeah, thank's Rocky. I'm a bit colour blind so i sometimes don't notice link text.

I was watching some 3 part inverview with Bo from GRIN last night about the history of GRIN. It was interesting when he talked about working with Capcom on Bionic Commando. He mentioned how they really give them creative freedom and, unlike western publishers, how that's something certain japanese publishers understand. Seeing as their previous project was GRAWS's with Ubi that's a clear indication that they hade little freedom in making GRAW's PC. So Ubi are more to blame than GRIN for sure.

Krise, can you elaborate a bit on what you meant by the differences between a realitic 1st person shooter and a realistic tactical shooter? Surely if you use strateg and tactics in any realistic 1st person shooter the result will be the same won't it?

[tecmic]

Hi,

Some interesting responses for sure, but the foundation problem is with the target market! GRAW2 for PC, although dumbed down, maybe, is not the primary income market! That's consoles, yes! I did say (Con)soles.

Even though PC inputs (k/board & mouse) provide far superior and precise control for practically all game genres, the console is the publisher's target market.

The wider 'target' market are arcade gamers, who require no depth, no tactics, no difficulty!

UBI and any of the others, make decisions based upon where the biggest profits will come from. Quality of game distils down to how good the graphics are and these are what they sell in their advertising.

We shouldn't be surprised to watch them neglect what we consider to be true gaming software for what they consider to be profitable.

Edited December 15, 2008 by tecmic

[Fletch]

I think (just a WAG) that the biggest reason is the MP Sever interface. In GR the ability for an Admin to set up the server for certain game type and to exclude certain weapons made it great for tourney play. You could have your team vs the computer or vs another team. The MP server interface in GR:AW was just not that great and we never could get more that 3 people on the server no matter who was hosting, the 4th always dropped and more times than not someone would fall through the ground.

Edit: It was however alot better than GR:AW(1) MP. Plus I also have to agree I really enjoyed both games SP campaigns except for a small annoying thing about being channeled down the map from one objective to the next.

[Poita]

It's interesting that most of the responses seemnot to focus on actual gameply but rather , server design, business model, net code etc. So are you saying that if everything else was fine then the gameplay would be [GR] enough to have created the same scene as [GR] did.

Yeah Fletch, i'm almost through the GRAW2 campaign and it's been a real blast. It drives me crazy though how if i even go half a block the wrong way it threatens to abord the game. That's not nearly as open as [GR] was. Still pretty great action though.

[Fletch]

It's interesting that most of the responses seemnot to focus on actual gameply but rather , server design, business model, net code etc. So are you saying that if everything else was fine then the gameplay would be [GR] enough to have created the same scene as [GR] did.

Well if all that was fixed I would (and I think others) would ask for the maps to be open, no more channeling you down kill zones. Instead make all the objectives available to play in any order and have the objective zone do a 360 around it so that no matter what direction you come from you trip the area before getting in to it so that AI does not magiciclly appear in front of you. Personally I would like to see all the AI fielded as soon as you join. Have them not only at static post but also on random patrol paths so you don't know where they all are at any one time. Then have the AI that is responsible for they area actually defend the area like real people would. The Stationary post take cover when necessary and the patrols try to flank you. Alot of work I know but I think it could be done. The best maps in the [GR] had something close to that but while no perfect the AI was a little better at responding in some cases.

[Poita]

Yeah the AI is weird in GRAW2. Sometimes it's good. I really like the way they use surpressing fire; at least the way they batter your location with fire while you are pinned down. At other times they just stand there and do nothing. At the end of the 'Long walk' mission i went up the building to get the Heli extraction. I thought the mission was over so i went up there and there were three guys standing right near the steps to the heli pad. I thought they were my guyso i didnt shoot. I approached them and they did nothing. One of them had his gun pointed at me but didnt fire. After A while i realised theywere the enemy so i point blank opened fire and mowed them down.

Anyway my post is mostly about MP so the single player probs don't really matter. So do you think the mp GRAW2 would have taken off online if many of the none gameplay parts were different at launch?

[Fletch]

CoOp is MP too and as such you fight against the AI with your friends. But yes if all those little things were the same as the original and they used the same GR:AW2 maps, etc, I do believe the Tournaments that were so popular in GR would have been able to happen in GR:AW as well. I also think we would be playing right now instead of typing.

[davros]

My view is stability is a key.

GRAW2 crashes 1-3 times every night for people at our LAN games nights (usually 4-6 people) . That's just not ok. It ruins the suspension of reality and game play for all the players, not just the guys that's CTD'd. (and no, it's not the PC's, LAN etc...it's the game).

And if it's the guy playing as server, we are all out.

It does not take too many of those events to reduce the enthusiasm to play. A bit like when I lost my Oblivion game in a HDD corruption. I had "invested" 100's of hours in that game - I just walked away and never played it again. It was too great a loss to start all over again.

All the above points are valid too, but for me, it's the stability issues that cause me to wonder if it's worth double clicking the icon.

It's like you never know if it will reward you or disapoint you. Not good in life, not good in a game.

Dav

[Fletch]

I thought I mentioned the dropping and that if that was one of the things that got fixed the world would be a much happier place.

[davros]

I thought I mentioned the dropping and that if that was one of the things that got fixed the world would be a much happier place.

Yes, and my comment was more the crashing. We play only lan games and on the whole, do not have issues with disconnects/dropping out. For my friends and I, it's been all out crashes. No program should crash like that. None.

The impact of this is that we are increasingly reluctant to play as we know there's a good chance that we'll end up annoyed. We do not play games to be disapointed. Smack a dog enough times and event it wil learn not to come to you.

I still play and am actively making missions...so i must take alot of smacking!

Dav.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

Goods....

Sound, Environment, Physics, Big maps, rate of fire switching, effective built in anticheat (Bans can't be circumvented), Great single play

Bads

Server overhead, Server commands incomplete or not all can be switched on the fly, harder to mod, rate of fire bug as mentioned never fixed, in need of new maps, no replay or record feature (killed the matching with that and overhead) Draw distance cut off instead of faded away. No xfire or direct ip support

[krise madsen]

Krise, can you elaborate a bit on what you meant by the differences between a realitic 1st person shooter and a realistic tactical shooter? Surely if you use strateg and tactics in any realistic 1st person shooter the result will be the same won't it?

It's mainly a question of mindset. Of course, the "evidence" is circumstantial. I can't very well dig into the brains of the GRIN team It just seemed like they were doin things the way developers would do with just about any game, with realism features being bolted onto the gameplay along the way. One thing would be the uncanny ability to stand up with a hefty sniper rifle and take out someone at long range.

Respectfully

krise madsen

[JJUK]

I think apart from the little bugs that annoyed us all and the poor server controls, (i mean did anyone of the think to put in a Gr disc and see how easy it was to start a game??) we all had waited so long for Graw 1 and had even built comps to run it. When they announced Graw 2 we all thought great they will have updated Graw 1 and all will be fine, but it wasnt they hadnt fixed anything and had just updated the graphics. Obviously it was nice but all the goodness from Graw 1 was now gone and we was left with the incomplete Graw 2.

I personally like them both and would still play Graw2 but i like to match in games and there just wasnt the player base as everyone had gone.

[rossiski]

Two words...

Coop gameplay.

There really has not been a game since that takes coop to the level that GR did. After the MP deathmatch folks got bored and move to the next flashy game, Ghost Recon provided an almost-infinitely variable platform for repeatable, enjoyable coop gameplay. That's what contributed to 4 groundbreaking years of community support, IMO.