Paris studio versions announced (x360+PS3)

[kleaneasy]

Whiteknight77:

the OICW was big, heavy, bulky and expensive.

And what about the XM8 rifle in GR2\Summit Strike? supposedly even clerks are going to be armed by 2014 guess what? cancelled

I know what the OICW was and why it was canceled. I was more or less telling Klean that GR was not as futuristic as she thinks it was unless only having one prototype type weapon classifies the game as futuristic.

You seem to be missing the point, it doesnt matter if GR had 1 or 20 weapons based on future tech it had more than zero, the game was based in the future, and contained future weaponry as a result.

You cant all suddenly decide to pretend the first game was not based in the future with future tech weaponry just because you've now decided you would prefer to settle with current tech.

[Sgt. Atoa]

Dude the television advancement was a joke I suggest you RE-READ my post too, those gizmos are fine for show at some convention or magazine but most of them don't actually work in a real enviroment and btw last time I was there in the desert Special Forces where using more or less the same conventional equipment, never saw land warrior, laser rifle or your magic blanket but I guess your unit is a friend of some Special Forces unit and you saw them using it

BTW The Nazgul are Ghost without the blanket check them out lol

Edited February 10, 2010 by Sgt. Atoa

[Dick Splash]

BTW The Nazgul are Ghost without the blanket check them out lol

That's exactly what I thought when I saw the video.

Ho Hum!...looks like we're not getting a GR with updated graphics after all. Thanks for listening to our humble community Ubi. Perhaps Kimi's feedback emails went awry.

Deja vu anyone?

DS

[AlienShogun]

Dude the television advancement was a joke I suggest you RE-READ my post too, those gizmos are fine for show at some convention or magazine but most of them don't actually work in a real enviroment and btw last time I was there in the desert Special Forces where using more or less the same conventional equipment, never saw land warrior, laser rifle or your magic blanket but I guess your unit is a friend of some Special Forces unit and you saw them using it

We did operation with SOF units plenty of times yes, and they were using better equipment than us.

By the way just because a SOF unit is using what looks like an M4 doesn't mean it is. It is more than likely the piston driven M4.

We have already been over land warrior, it was scrapped. Also I never said any of the tech when it was shown in ghost recon was currently in use. What I DID say was that the games are very close to being accurate with the times they projected stuff to be in use by. I never said either that "laser rifles" or the "magic blanket" are in use either, quit acting like an idiot. The game is called Future Soldier for a reason and the tech that was shown in the video so far IS based on actual concept and prototype equipment being developed.

I'm also guessing last time you were in the desert was '91. I'm also guessing you were not in a combat arms unit, let alone infantry.

Edited February 10, 2010 by AlienShogun

[WhiteKnight77]

Whiteknight77:

the OICW was big, heavy, bulky and expensive.

And what about the XM8 rifle in GR2\Summit Strike? supposedly even clerks are going to be armed by 2014 guess what? cancelled

I know what the OICW was and why it was canceled. I was more or less telling Klean that GR was not as futuristic as she thinks it was unless only having one prototype type weapon classifies the game as futuristic.

You seem to be missing the point, it doesnt matter if GR had 1 or 20 weapons based on future tech it had more than zero, the game was based in the future, and contained future weaponry as a result.

You cant all suddenly decide to pretend the first game was not based in the future with future tech weaponry just because you've now decided you would prefer to settle with current tech.

That's the thing, I may have used the OICW a handful of times, but my usual weapons in GR was the M82, M119 or the M4 SOCOM. I have been known to use the MM1 playing Defend too. I just didn't like the OICW.

[krise madsen]

if I want a bloody cloaking device I'll play bloody Crysis.

I would like to amend my position on this: I was too quick off the starting blocks on that one. But hey, that's what you get from a grumpy old fart like me who's still fuming that I didn't get a proper GR Sequel for PC with GR2

It's not that I have anything against GR:FS having cloaking devices. It's Ubi's game and they can do with it what they want. They can add lightsabers and phasers for all I care.

No, what I'm railing against is the notion that as long as it takes place in the future and it's theoretically possible, it's "realistic". Wormhole travel and anti-gravity aircraft are also theoretically possible. I've heard it all before with GRAW and it's just as silly now as it was then. Just call Ghost Recon a sci-fi shooter and it's a whole different ballgame.

I know what the OICW was and why it was canceled. I was more or less telling Klean that GR was not as futuristic as she thinks it was unless only having one prototype type weapon classifies the game as futuristic.

You seem to be missing the point, it doesnt matter if GR had 1 or 20 weapons based on future tech it had more than zero, the game was based in the future, and contained future weaponry as a result.

You cant all suddenly decide to pretend the first game was not based in the future with future tech weaponry just because you've now decided you would prefer to settle with current tech.

Actually, kleaneasy, you seem to be missing the point: There is a huge difference between the OICW (an amalmagation of existing, well-known, tried and tested technology*), and a wearable cloaking system. That's like saying that adding the F-35 to a flight simulator is the same as adding the Millennium Falcon "because it's all future".

(*=Brass cartridge ammo from the 19th century, airburst fuzs from the 20th century and - and I'm being generous here, timewise - laser and computer technology from the 1970's.)

[kleaneasy]

That's the thing, I may have used the OICW a handful of times, but my usual weapons in GR was the M82, M119 or the M4 SOCOM. I have been known to use the MM1 playing Defend too. I just didn't like the OICW.

How does you not using it translate into it not being a future weapon and being in the game?

Actually, kleaneasy, you seem to be missing the point: There is a huge difference between the OICW (an amalmagation of existing, well-known, tried and tested technology*), and a wearable cloaking system. That's like saying that adding the F-35 to a flight simulator is the same as adding the Millennium Falcon "because it's all future".

(*=Brass cartridge ammo from the 19th century, airburst fuzs from the 20th century and - and I'm being generous here, timewise - laser and computer technology from the 1970's.)

krise I won’t pretend to know what is and isn’t in development for future weaponry or at what stage of reality the OICW was etc compared to a cloaking device now. I don’t know, and unlikely to ever be in a position to know. Some who are apparently in a position to know seem to think its a closer reality than some here believe but ultimately as I said before (either here or Ubi, I can’t recall now) the devs are not able to read into the future, they can only work with what technology is currently being worked on and what their advisors suggest has a plausible chance of being in use at some point in the future at which the game is set.

[bogiegraphics]

I probably will not buy 1 of these games.... I'm going to end up buying 2 since I have 2 PCs

Regardless of any promo video, the Tom Clancy brands have proven to be great tactical shooters with a great reputation. Even the nay-sayers would not be on this forum stirring up silliness if they didn't care.

Rocky, Kleaneasy and Kami - Thanks for the updates and keep them coming!! I look forward to seeing whats next and the "buzz" you all are creating - seems to be working

PS: pardon my spelling and grammer, I'm American.

[TheNatureRoy]

Actually, kleaneasy, you seem to be missing the point: There is a huge difference between the OICW (an amalmagation of existing, well-known, tried and tested technology*), and a wearable cloaking system. That's like saying that adding the F-35 to a flight simulator is the same as adding the Millennium Falcon "because it's all future".

(*=Brass cartridge ammo from the 19th century, airburst fuzs from the 20th century and - and I'm being generous here, timewise - laser and computer technology from the 1970's.)

Exactly. You summed it up perfectly. You have to draw a line somewhere, and for my personal tastes, Ubisoft is drawing the line waaaaaay too far away from believable.

When you're talking about 'future tech' there is a massive range of what you could be referring to -- from items that are essentially completely designed and functional and just waiting to go into full-scale production and can be expected to be fielded in the next 5-10 years (which is where I would prefer the line be drawn), to technology that is actually being developed and shows some promise but is a long, long way away from being developed enough to be fielded (HULC exoskeletons for example), to technology that more or less exists but needs significant breakthroughs before it could be shaped in a form that could be fielded by infantry (laser weaponry for example) to concepts that are theoretically possible but requiring of massive advancements before being fielded (personal cloaking devices that are more than just projector and camera tricks).

The fact that this game appears to be using the really crazy stuff as its calling card is unfortunate. It makes it more akin to HALO or Crysis (which also base all their future technology on real-world concepts) to me than what I would prefer from Ghost Recon.

I guess to me it's a question of whether it's more military or sci-fi. I mean technically MW2 is military sci-fi, and so is HALO and the movie Aliens, but I'd consider MW2 'military' and HALO and Aliens 'sci-fi' if I had to assign them one or the other. And right now, I'd say GR:FS is more 'sci-fi' than 'military' too. And maybe it's going to be a completely kick-ass sci-fi game -- I hope so -- but I was hoping more for a military experience from GR.

Edited February 10, 2010 by TheNatureRoy

[Sgt. Atoa]

Alienshogun lets do something

In 10 years from now let's meet at this same thread and we can countinue our little discussion

but you better show me some working predator/invisible blanket BEEN use by the Army ok?

Been a member of this forum for altmost 10 years I'm looking foward to meet with you here in 2020

Our point is we been begging Ubi Soft for a proper tactical shooter since 2002 just like [GR] you know the one that

won many Game of the Year awards but I guess you missed the drama with the PC version of GR2 and GRAW's and why they ask for our feedback? I never, never saw somebody here or at the official forums PC or console sections asking for an Invisible blanket/predator cloaking device if I want to play with a cloaking device I'l just get the new Aliens vs Predator which by the way I have in preorder.

There is no doub in my mind that the game is going to sell well there are people out there ho likes that type of game play just like you, heck I might get it when the game hits $20.00 or less just to chek it out but in the mean time halo3 will suffice my SCI FI military FPS cravings (the Elites have a cloaking device too)

I'm not a fan of BI but OA is looking kind of atractive to me now since there is no other game too look foward

btw your last paragrahp you are wrong and then wright

Edited February 10, 2010 by Sgt. Atoa

[AlienShogun]

Alienshogun lets do something

In 10 years from now let's meet at this same thread and we can countinue our little discussion

but you better show me some working predator/invisible blanket BEEN use by the Army ok?

Been a member of this forum for altmost 10 years I'm looking foward to meet with you here in 2020

Our point is we been begging Ubi Soft for a proper tactical shooter since 2002 just like [GR] you know the one that

won many Game of the Year awards but I guess you missed the drama with the PC version of GR2 and GRAW's and why they ask for our feedback? I never, never saw somebody here or at the official forums PC or console sections asking for an Invisible blanket/predator cloaking device if I want to play with a cloaking device I'l just get the new Aliens vs Predator which by the way I have in preorder.

There is no doub in my mind that the game is going to sell well there are people out there ho likes that type of game play just like you, heck I might get it when the game hits $20.00 or less just to chek it out but in the mean time halo3 will suffice my SCI FI military FPS cravings (the Elites have a cloaking device too)

I'm not a fan of BI but OA is looking kind of atractive to me now since there is no other game too look foward

btw your last paragrahp you are wrong and then wright

My god, you just don't get it. This whole thing has been about what is and is not used in games and if it should be there or not. I too want the game to go back to its original roots, however the people spouting off about crap they know little to nothing about (regarding the tech in the games) is just absurd.

The fact of the matter is that reactive camo has been in development for years, Ubisoft is now deciding it is time to use in in the games time frame now. the OICW and XM8 were in testing/prototype phase and they made it into previous games, yet those technologies never came to fruition. Your logic is extremely flawed. Reactive camo may never actually see the light of day, but lots of military tech doesn't. Even some of it in the first game. That doesn't automatically make the game suck, you damn nay sayers are as bad as any company that ruins a game. Especially when you don't know what you are talking about.

Now you are admitting to not even being combat arms, that lets me know right there I shouldn't even bother arguing with you about battlefield weaponry and what is/is not used, and I'm not going to bother with you anymore because you clearly have no clue what you are talking about.

Edited February 10, 2010 by AlienShogun

[krise madsen]

krise I won't pretend to know what is and isn't in development for future weaponry or at what stage of reality the OICW was etc compared to a cloaking device now. I don't know, and unlikely to ever be in a position to know. Some who are apparently in a position to know seem to think its a closer reality than some here believe but ultimately as I said before (either here or Ubi, I can't recall now) the devs are not able to read into the future, they can only work with what technology is currently being worked on and what their advisors suggest has a plausible chance of being in use at some point in the future at which the game is set.

Ah, I didn't explain myself properly then, sorry

I was making a counterargument specifically to your argument with WK about the OICW vs. cloaking device, with me contending that comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.

As for the game (GR:SF) itself? *shrugs* Whatever floats the devs boat. I'm sure it will be a well-made and popular game, and I don't really care one way or the other. There is no inherent right or wrong with a fastidious adherence to ultra-realism or taking lots of creative liberties with reality. I don't think I have to explain which one I prefer.

My other comments weren't aimed at you in particular as much as the forum discussions in general, ever since info on GRAW started to appear. Whenever someone notes that a particular feature doesn't seem very plausible (even in a near-future setting) we get the same song and dance about "look how much stuff we take for granted today that we didn't even dream of twenty years ago". Common sense is countered with a knee-jerk "you can't argue against an unknown future". It is, at best, intellectually lazy, but more frequently simply inane and stupid. And it's starting to grate on me (me being a grumpy old fart ).

Just once I'd like to hear someone argue "OK, maybe it isn't entirely kosher, but how do you feel about it as a gameplay feature?".

Edited February 10, 2010 by krise madsen

[Sgt. Atoa]

Lol don't bother with me but please let me know when you get your laser rifle I been waiting to see something like that since I was a little kid back in the mid 70's and I know laser do exist since that time frame

best of luck with our game

[Rocky]

@AlienShogun and Sgt. Atoa.

Great informative posts, but there are whole paragraphs that are solely comment on another poster and we don't do that. Comment on the game not other posters please - it makes everything so much more flame retardant.

Thanks.

[AlienShogun]

@AlienShogun and Sgt. Atoa.

Great informative posts, but there are whole paragraphs that are solely comment on another poster and we don't do that. Comment on the game not other posters please - it makes everything so much more flame retardant.

Thanks.

Sorry, it just asses me up when either

A: someone isn't comprehending what is being talked about.

B: someone is ranting/commenting/bashing on something they know nothing about.

or

C: Both

Needless to say the flaming is done, as I won't be responding him anymore anyway.

Edited February 10, 2010 by AlienShogun

[Sgt. Atoa]

Im done Rocky

[Forrester]

an exosceleton that makes you jump 30-40 meters would rip your body apart (impossible IMO)

a cloac well ther are flexible tft screens made nowadays, and they even implemented such stuff in fabric, only a good camera reading a 360 by 180 angle and projecting that on the cloac which off curse is fitted with nano technology processing rays in angles so you can see a different picture from every angle, well its possible, expensive but possible. It wouldn't surprise me if companies are working on it as we speak. for square features as tanks these devises are at test at the moment.....

[GE niss]

The new ghost recon beta, I can not wait

[Rocky]

an exosceleton that makes you jump 30-40 meters would rip your body apart (impossible IMO)

Remember when they said cars couldn't go faster than 30mph because your eyes would pop out? I'm sure I read that somewhere once.

Never say never Forrester!

Anyway, haven't you seen Iron Man?

[beonder13]

I think I just puked in my mouth a little... it burns.

GR1 was the best tactical arcade shooter of its time. All the core players asked for was a modern version of that tactical game play. There are so many things that could have made it "fresh and exciting" without destroying the premise.

I guess we'll see where this goes... but so far it seems like Hollywood. Take the new flashy flick and make more of the same. And this whole "Buy this other game we have coming out so that you can be in the beta" wreaks of "lets get some GR fans to buy this other game that they wouldn't normally spend their cash on. AND HURRY WHILE SUPPLIES LAST!" I'll wait for the videos and online chatter to make a purchase decision. And with the track record... I'm guessing fall 2011 or so.

Utterly disappointed at this time.

[post moved from the website discussion thread and merged with the Paris studio versions thread]

Edited February 11, 2010 by Pave Low

[DBest1]

Ghillie suit is back

From checking out the Ghillie sutes all three Ghosts were wearing in the teaser video it looks promising. Thats one eliment from the [GR] that made it's way back. I hope they keep the Exfiltration mode and build on it. What are you hoping for???

[Merged with the existing thread, where that is already under discussion]

Edited February 12, 2010 by Pave Low

[Ol' douche]

They're finally going completely sci-fi huh?

Just saw the new trailer. A cloak blanket? Seriously?

All right, we all know the franchise was heading this way, just sooner or later. I mean, look at that mumbo-jumbo EndWar. It's plot took place only seven years after GRAW2. We don't know exactly which year they are going to place the events of GR4 in, but we can definately expect more EndWar-ish high-tech hyperboles.

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/bigbo...58553_front.jpg

[post merged with the existing discussion thread and way oversize image change to URL]

Edited February 12, 2010 by Pave Low

[BS PALADIN]

From checking out the Ghillie sutes all three Ghosts were wearing in the teaser video it looks promising.

They weren't guille suits. They were active camo ( invisibility ) cloaks.

[Sgt. Atoa]

Hey at leat there is not mention of CPT. Mitchell, he maybe retired or to old to be in the field...perhaps the Army took his DNA and cloned him everything is possible with GR future soldier

[DBest1]

From checking out the Ghillie sutes all three Ghosts were wearing in the teaser video it looks promising.

They weren't guille suits. They were active camo ( invisibility ) cloaks.

Yea pretty much the same thing if you think about it. It blends with the enviroment to mask your presence. This might be a sp feature though can't see that being in mp modes lol, that would be a campers dream come true.