weapons

[Kira_Yamato1991]

I all ready have some favorite weapons to use on GR 3 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif like the XM8 and the XM29 (OICW) if I got the game I'm gonna kill some people http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif but first I hope that i can get it

[no_limits]

can't beat the SA80

[Delta_Hoot]

GR3 gotta have more gun options than this weak XM8 and XM29 system that only fires the standard .223 round. Since the Ghosts are super elite special forces, they need more variety and the ability to customize their weapons according to the mission.

So bring back the older guns and add the new round 6.8 SPC caliber. I'd like to see some variety such as in the Rainbow Six series, 'cause in the GR1 everybody olny used OIWC or the SA80. The rest were crappy, the sniper rifles were weak and goddamm unrealistic.

My weapon wishlist:

-the old and reliable M-14
-the trusty FAL 7,62mm
-P-90 and FN Five Seven pistol
-HK MK .23 pistol
-SIG -P228/229
-CZ -75 Combat
-HK-UMP .45 ACP
-Bring back all the MP5 family os subs and make them perform realisticly
-VSS-Vintorez
-Dragunov
-M-98
-Hecate and mini-Hecate sniper rifles
-Sako sniper rifles
-Customizable AK-74SU
-AN-94 with the real 2 round burst and more accuracy than in the pathetic version in GR1
-Variants of the M-14/M-21 sniper rifles.

All guns should be able to receive acessories. Make a better and more efficient loudout system, with more slots. Secondary guns must be standard and they need to fire real live ammo (in GR1 pistol seemed to fire blank rounds or rubber slugs).

[Delta_Hoot]

Originally posted by no_limits:
can't beat the SA80

You do know that the actual SA-80 is a real piece of shiat?

[Thunderpants1]

I guess you say that for all 5.56 caliber rifles. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Delta_Hoot]

No, not at all! The G36 and FNG 5,56mm are quite decent.

[WhiteKnight77]

One has to realize that the US military rarely uses weapons such as the P90 or the FAL. Point is, you will see people carrying M16s, M4, in some cases SF carry MP5s (I posted a picture around here somewhere), along with M24 and M82 sniper rifles. Why does everyone keep asking for weapons not in use by the US military? For mods, make what ever and create skins for characters to use 'em.

[Delta_Hoot]

Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:
One has to realize that the US military rarely uses weapons such as the P90 or the FAL. Point is, you will see people carrying M16s, M4, in some cases SF carry MP5s (I posted a picture around here somewhere), along with M24 and M82 sniper rifles. Why does everyone keep asking for weapons not in use by the US military? For mods, make what ever and create skins for characters to use 'em.



One has to realize that the US military rarely uses weapons such as the P90 or the FAL.

Yeah, i know that. But the Ghosts are U.S FICTIONAL elite soldiers, so i see no problem whatsoever in adding a new flavor to the game just for the sake of it.

GR1 also had FALs, SA80 and other weapons not COMMONLY used by U.S Special too. But it was very nice to have the option to choose them.

However, i have to diseagree with on one thing: U.S do use uncommon weapons too, they choose wathever they want to. Green Beretts are often found using soviet, western european or serbian guns in Iraq.

[WhiteKnight77]

5th SFG actually exists. While GR did have a few other weapons, the were used by spcialists where the weapons came from.

[Delta_Hoot]

Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:
5th SFG actually exists. While GR did have a few other weapons, the were used by spcialists where the weapons came from.

Yep, but that's only in the SP mode.

During multiplayer pretty much everybody used them. So i don't give a fying **** for what storyline(like the foreign specialists thing) they might come up with to justify the presense of more guns. It's simply stupid to limit any SF team to a couple of totally standardized guns, SF forces should have a varied arsenal to choose from as they have in the real world, period.


5th SFG actually exists

True that, but not the Ghosts, which are even above Delta's.

Anyway, i don't see your point in arguing agaisnt this concept. Are you against realism, or just being a smartass?

[XX55XX]

Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:
One has to realize that the US military rarely uses weapons such as the P90 or the FAL. Point is, you will see people carrying M16s, M4, in some cases SF carry MP5s (I posted a picture around here somewhere), along with M24 and M82 sniper rifles. Why does everyone keep asking for weapons not in use by the US military? For mods, make what ever and create skins for characters to use 'em.

Very true. But should GR3 see upgraded versions of such guns? It's 2011, and the US is at war. Shouldn't the American invest some money for development of new weaponry?

Newer versions of current guns in the American Army is what the game should be looking at.

[WhiteKnight77]

Right now, the OICW has been dumped and the XM8 testing has been halted. Think about that a bit. Heck, right now, Army sharpshooters are using converted M14s. They date back to Korea if not before. Something to think about.

[Prozac360]

My Wishlist http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

M4/M16 - With the most outrageous customization abilities ever.

- Chose from stocks, socom, Magpul, VLTOR or standard stocks.

-Weapon sights, Trijicons (at least 4 kinds, Reflex, TA01NSN, TA55 ) Aimpoint M68, Elcans, And some leupold scopes or somthing else.

-Suppressors
-Barrel Lengths
- Chose heat gaurds, KAC RIS or RAS, ARMS SIR.
- Upper Selection
- Lower Selection

ok now onto the rest, AKs with some limited upgrades.

RPK PKM AK47 AK74 MP5 MP5SD M9 MK23 M1911 SCAR FAL G3 M8 ... blah blah i could go on for ever...

of course i want some of thse to be upgradible and have diffrent versions of some of them.


Either way as long as they keep it to the basics of the army and the mexican army, ill be alright .

[Alex_HS]

Quality vs quantity, doesnt matter having lots of them if they all play the same or if some are overpowered and people use those exclusively.
Instead of having 50 diferent bs guns i would rather have a realistic amount of weapons that represent the real life counterpart has acuratly has possible.
Regarding fire modes, fire rates, penetration, acuracy, recoil, bullet drop and dispersion, velocity, sounds, etc.
The weapons are a very important aspect of these type of games and a great deal of atention should be used there instead of throwing a large amount of popular weapons that dont feel right.

[buddhiraja]

Originally posted by Prozac360:
M4/M16 - With the most outrageous customization abilities ever.

- Chose from stocks, socom, Magpul, VLTOR or standard stocks.

-Weapon sights, Trijicons (at least 4 kinds, Reflex, TA01NSN, TA55 ) Aimpoint M68, Elcans, And some leupold scopes or somthing else.

-Suppressors
-Barrel Lengths
- Chose heat gaurds, KAC RIS or RAS, ARMS SIR.
- Upper Selection
- Lower Selection

ok now onto the rest, AKs with some limited upgrades.

RPK PKM AK47 AK74 MP5 MP5SD M9 MK23 M1911 SCAR FAL G3 M8 ... blah blah i could go on for ever...

of course i want some of thse to be upgradible and have diffrent versions of some of them.

I agree. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Especially, having different types of OPTICAL SIGHTS, with their specific reticles, features, advantages and disadvantages, would be very exciting. I am interested in the Trijicon Acog and Aimpoint Red Dot. Having the ability to add different kinds of attachments together, is essential ( not like Raven Shield, where we have to choose between a scope or a suppressor ).

[Luderbamsen]

Some previews mention a "caseless rifle", and there is a GR3 screenshot of something named "Weapon" on the HUD (with an XM8 image). This (http://www.cryeassociates.com/work/12.htm#) might be it. Apparently, it's just a mock-up for research purposes, but one could speculate that it's been included to sex things up a bit.

[babydave]

no weapon customization, when games try to do it, it usually ends up ruining the balance!


-Weapon sights, Trijicons (at least 4 kinds, Reflex, TA01NSN, TA55 ) Aimpoint M68, Elcans, And some leupold scopes or somthing else.

-Suppressors
-Barrel Lengths
- Chose heat gaurds, KAC RIS or RAS, ARMS SIR.
- Upper Selection
- Lower Selection

way too much detail, the majority of UBI's customers wont understand what they are, let alone what they do.

but have a varied choice of weapons that are actually useful for replayability. and not just US weapons for MP, other NATO countries weapons would be appreciated such as G36, FAMAS and SA80 etc

[Prozac360]

tried AA yet dave?

they did a pretty decent job of getting the optics and accessories right

personally iv played with a lot of real sights/scopes ( havent got to shoot with them yet )

but they all have their advantages and disadvantages... and will make a huge impact on how you use your rifle

All i listed above are really nice, and the AK PSO scope was horrible IMO =P

[X13lazeX]

Originally posted by babydave:
no weapon customization, when games try to do it, it usually ends up ruining the balance!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> -Weapon sights, Trijicons (at least 4 kinds, Reflex, TA01NSN, TA55 ) Aimpoint M68, Elcans, And some leupold scopes or somthing else.

-Suppressors
-Barrel Lengths
- Chose heat gaurds, KAC RIS or RAS, ARMS SIR.
- Upper Selection
- Lower Selection

way too much detail, the majority of UBI's customers wont understand what they are, let alone what they do.

but have a varied choice of weapons that are actually useful for replayability. and not just US weapons for MP, other NATO countries weapons would be appreciated such as G36, FAMAS and SA80 etc </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

way to much detail...so you want just the same old first person shooters? customizations of weapons should be in ghost recon 3 and customization of gear as well (appearance)..witch i heared is a requirement of xbox 360..

13laze

[Operative47]

These are some weapons I would like to see in GR3. I know some of these weapons are already in GR1 & GR2, but im hoping that with the new engine they are using to make GR3, they can make better weapon models of these guns.

USP SOPMOD
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/uspsopmod.jpg
MK23
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/mk23.jpg
MP7A1
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/mp7a1.jpg
PDW-SD
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/pdwsd.jpg
AKS-74U
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/aks74u.jpg
G36C COMPACT
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/theg36ccompactcarbine.jpg
SG 552
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/sg552.jpg
FAMAS G2
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/famasg2.jpg
SA80
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/sa80.jpg
FNC
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/FNC.jpg
M4
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/m4mod1.jpg
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/m4mod2.jpg
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/m4mod3.jpg
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/m4mods4.jpg
OPTIC MODS FOR THE M4
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/scopes_1.jpg
G36K CARBINE
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/theg36kcarbine.jpg
XM8
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/xm8.jpg
M1A SCOUT
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/m1ascout.jpg
SPR
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/sprm16modified.jpg
M14 DMR
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/spr2.jpg
VSS VINTOREZ SNIPER RIFLE
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/vssvintorezsniperrifle.jpg
WA2000
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/wa2000ira3.jpg
SIG 550
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/sig550.gif
Remington 700 in Accuracy International
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/remington700.jpg
MK48 7.62mm Machine Gun
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Operative/mk487.jpg

[GabRaz1981]

Well considering the Ghost's should be part of SOCOM, then their weapons would be distinctive to that organization. For one, the XM-8 lost the bid to be the official rifle of SOCOM; instead the FNH (makers of the M-249/MK-48/MK-46) SCAR-L and H will be the M-4s replacement in the near future (SOCOM placed an order for about 40000). Considering it's 2014 then there's a good bet that the XM-25 25mm GL would be available along with the 40mm EGLM for the SCAR to replace the M-203.


My list would look like this:

FNH SCAR-L (various barrel lengths, 5.56mm) with or without EGLM and optics
FNH SCAR-H (various barrel lengths, 7.62mm NATO or 7.62x39 russian) with or without EGLM and optics
Colt M-4/M203 SOPMOD (for old times sake)
ATK XM-25 (25mm smart GL)
SPR
CQBR (Short barrel M-4 used for close quarters combat)
West Coast M-16A4 with 4x ACOG (for the USMC traditionalists)
M-24
M-107 (Barrett M-82A1M)
XM-109 (25mm Anti-material sniper rifle)
MK-46 mod 0 (5.56mm LMG)
MK-48 mod 0 (7.62mm LMG)
M9 (or it's replacement)
M-11 (Sig 226, I've never seen an MK-23 or USP in any of the current warzones)
M-136 (AT-4, disposable rpg)
Predator (disposable AT-Anti bunker missile)
WAM Hornet (smart AT mine)
M-2HB (12.7mm crew served HMG)
XM-307 (25mm crew served HMG)
XM-312 (12.7mm crew served HMG)
MK-47 (official 40mm GL of SOCOM)

Assortment of AKs, RPGs, Kords, Dshks, and PKs from the enemy (modern and old variants).

[WhiteKnight77]

Originally posted by GabRaz1981:
instead the FNH (makers of the M-249/MK-48/MK-46) SCAR-L and H will be the M-4s replacement in the near future (SOCOM placed an order for about 40000).

Are you sure?

Straight from an instructor/operator at USAJFKSWCS.



I am not sure what you mean by that post Militiaman but I will say this. The US is going to adopt a different caliber. The smoke is already on the horizon. Here is how it works. First Special Ops adopts a weapon or idea. I do not mean in a limited use fashion, but on a grand scale. Then in 5-7 years the rest of the military does likewise.

Special Ops has begun their adoption of a larger caliber round. We started to receive and employ 6.8 uppers on our weapons last year. And every branch - except the Air Force, is begining the process. The key is when the Army Special Ops comes on line as they have the most people. It is going to happen. The Army has pretty much killed the XM8 program out of caliber alone. There is also another major design issue at fault, but it is pretty much dead.

You can slap the M-4 if you want, but operators had their chance and still preferred the design. We didn't want another weapons system, we wanted the M4 in 6.8. As I said above, we have assault versions of the 7.62 round and it is just too much when you are trying to work close.

Also H&K has some good ideas, but they have proven to be garbage for us once the design leaves the table. By garbage I mean H&K is great at building a weapon system for a single purpose, but not something that goes from the jungle, to the desert, to the city, to the ocean in one fell swoop.


I should have a response on the order of the SCAR shortly.

[GabRaz1981]

I'm pretty sure that (militarily at least) the 6.8 just like the XM-8 is dead. The XM-8s defeciency had nothing to do with caliber, it can actually be converted to 6.8; it's just that the last of the tests, where supposedly (it's all hearsay) that the XM-8 failed. Additionally HK made the dumbest mistake by saying that most XM-8s would be manufactured in Germany, that pissed congress and the money dried out.

http://www.bellum.nu/armoury/FNSCAR-L001.jpg

The multi-caliber requirement for the SCAR did not include 6.8, it included 5.56, 7.62 NATO, and 7.62x39 russian (the russian bein used in the SCAR-H, which is adapted to receive AK mags as well). The SCAR program progressed well, with a critical design review not 3 months ago: http://www.network54.com/Forum/thread?forumid=211833&messageid=1117709915. Plus from the wording of the article I just posted, it's sure that the SCAR is the M-4s replacement in SOCOM (along with other rifles like the M-14 DMR). If I remember, it beat out the XM-8, the Robinson Arms XCR, and the Colt M-5 (a monolithic receiver version of the M-4, with a short stroke gas piston).

These are the order numbers:

The contract(s) maximums are 84,000 SCAR-L Standard; 28,000 SCAR-L CQC conversions; 12,000 SCAR-L SV; 15,000 SCAR-H Standard; 7,000 SCAR-H CQC conversions; and 12,000 SCAR-H SV. lol guess I was off by oh........~90000 units.

SV: Sniper variant
CQC: close quarters combat

[WhiteKnight77]

I could have sworn I posted the exact words of a SF operative that was with 5Th SFG at Ft. Cambell prior to returning to the school at Ft. Bragg. He did say that they were staying with the M4 by saying:


We didn't want another weapons system, we wanted the M4 in 6.8.

[GabRaz1981]

I'm not denying what he said isn't true, but remember that it was only one SFG that took (and participated in) the 6.8 development seriously from start to finish. Additionally SOCOM is a relatively large group which includes units from the Air Force, Navy, and USMC (along with other Army units); who's to say that the SEALS, USMC Det-1, Rangers, or even Detla really gave much care about the 6.8 issue?

Finally, it's not up to the individual operator or even SFG to decide what's best, or what's doable for them, granted they have alot of leeway, but the final decision eventually comes from the brass and SCAR is proof of that. And frankly I think it's a good system, tailor made from the ground up for SF units.

I guess adopting a new caliber, even if only for SOCOM, would mean going to NATO and getting STANAG certification, the only round I know that was able to do that is the FN 5.7 I think.



I just hope the dev team for GR3 don't get caught with their pants down if the XM-8 ever gets cancelled, eventhough the XM-8 was never supposed to be there in the first place (SOCOM didn't like it).


EDIT: lol, just checked the Grin website for the first time, the pic there made up of 4 square IS the SCAR-L. Though someone should tell them that that's the prototype (I hated seeing pics of GR-2 with that green prototype XM-8, while a newer version was around in the real world with flip-up sights and all), The actuall version dosn't have a the screws along the length of the upper receiver and has a flip up front sight post, and if I'm not mistaken the rails on the side and bottom are actually machined on the receiver and non removeable.

[Prozac360]

i have heard, from other sources, that the m4 was actually prefered over the m8 and other systems for special forces.

of course the scar is good too so of course it will be in the game

[GabRaz1981]

I'm pretty sure SF prefer their M-4s over any other system at the moment, it's the one they're most familiar with; plus the various recent off-shots like the MK-11, MK-12, and CQBR make it even more likely that they'll be around for at least 3-5 years. But given GR-3s timeframe (2013-2014) it's more likely that SOCOM would have transitioned to the SCAR by that time.

[ROTTWEILER.]

Customizable kits would be nice. Be able to mix and match rifles, pistols, grenades and whatever other combination of sensors, explosives and so on. Would be nice to have every weapon available for selection with a simple upper limit of how many items can be carried by a soldier at one time. Best Sniper Gun out there... SR25 Silenced.

ROTT

http://www.impactguns.com/store/media/KMC_MKII_MOD0.jpg

[MICYW]

I've seen enough and played enough M16's and M4's they should add some more guns to the list.
And customisation of kits would also be nice.

[GabRaz1981]

I don't know, I'm not to keen on seeing stuff that don't belong in SOCOMs arsenal, which frankly is quite large on it's own, all of which being perfectly customizable. It doesn't "feel" right to have a member of SOCOM lugging around an L85A1/2 or FAMAS in 2014 when he's got a massive arsenal of better more capable weapons specifically designed for him and the missions he goes on.

Though I do agree on the ability of the user to be able to pick up enemy weapons and ammunition (if he has a SCAR-H configured for 7.62x39 ammo, then he should be able to take enemy AK ammo).

[babydave]

It doesn't "feel" right to have a member of SOCOM lugging around an L85A1/2 or FAMAS in 2014 when he's got a massive arsenal of better more capable weapons specifically designed for him and the missions he goes on.

I agree, but for MP i think you should be able to choose from a wide vaitey of weapons...such as the SA80, G36 etc etc. I would get bored after a while, it would be like playing GR1 multiplayer with US weapons only.

As for AA na i never really got into it but ill take your word for it, im not against some customization if it can be done well , i just reckon it gets to the point where a game is just for entertainment purposes, and then theres shooting as a hobby/sport http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Q_ARMM]

http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/images/SOF_Weapons.jpg
Latest Generation SCAR-L w/ EGLM
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/images/SCAR_2nd_gen_w_EGLM.jpg
Mk 13 Mod 2 Sniper Rifle (.300 Win Mag)
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/images/mk13mod2.jpg
Mk 14 Mod 0 EBR (Enhanced Battle Rifle)
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/images/mk14mod0-ebr_left.jpg
Barrett XM109 "Payload Rifle" 25x59mm
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/images/xm109_5-chamber_brake.jpg

[GabRaz1981]

Thanks for the pic of the revised SCAR and EGLM, hadn't seen it before. I read that it'll be modified even more by making the upper completely one piece (removing the various screws along it's length, and that the side and bottom rails will also be machined from the beginning on the weapon instead of being added.


Both SV (L and H) variants of the SCAR will be replacing the Mk 11s, 12s, and 14s eventually.

[ColinCJ]

LINKS between GR2 and GR3 and weapons are common.
Reasons are obvious ease of application and use.

It would therfore make a lot of sence to see the same weapons in most games.
The m4 is a realy good example as WK pointed out.

GR2 Summit Strike is a good example of weapon choice for us to use and the research that goes into new weapons for the games we play.
Info thanks to Heather Chandler (Producer) & Jeff McGann (Lead Designer)


"What about weapons?"
Will all the weapons from GR2 be available? And what's this I hear about the SCAR being included for SS?

"Along with all of the available downloadable content weapons we have kept the weapons from Ghost Recon 2 in Summit Strike. Several of the weapons were renamed to match their updated versions or regional specific variants, but players will have no problems finding their old favorites.

The SCAR will be included in Summit Strike. In fact, several versions of the SCAR will be available for all of the different weapon classes. We’ve included both the L and H versions, designating the type of ammunition, light (5.56) and heavy (7.62), that will be available. Also, be on the lookout for the silenced SCAR that is available as a primary weapon.

"Were you guys able to get hands-on time with one?"

We worked very closely with our authenticity contacts to create the in-game version of the SCAR. We had full access to exclusive videos and photos of the weapon prototypes. We were also invited to fire the SCAR at the FNH USA weapon testing facility.

I feel we get a good choice of weapons as it is.

I have been playing gr1 since it came out and I only use half a dozen weapons.

Somtimes its not the weapon its how it feels to you the indevidual, I know that sounds a bit daft but I love the SA80 it just feels right.
Not sure why.
Colin

[Q_ARMM]

XM25
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/images/xm25-2005.jpg
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/images/xm25_in_use.jpg
XM320
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/images/xm320.jpg
XM110 SASS Candidates
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/images/KAC_XM110_SASS.jpg
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/images/Rem_AR10.jpg

[ROTTWEILER.]

As far as the ability to customize kits... our real life Special Forces do it every day. The arsenal available to them may be limited and obviously cannot include every weapon ever made. But our Delta, Seal and Rangers chose from a huge array of weapons depending on the mission. A Marine Sniper might want an SR25 a side arm and a claymore to cover his six depending on the location he chooses to setup in. I'd rather have that flexibility than be fed whatever combination is set as the default. AND… Options not obstacles. Why not make it a setup option? Customized kits on or standard kits on? Everyone wins and it would be awesome for online multiplayer games.

[spm1138]

I'd like to see the Single Player stuff kept good and authentic but a nice wide range of stuff put into multiplayer to keep everybody happy.

I suppose you could then include a system whereby you could set rules and restrict one team to US weapons and another to Chinese weapons.

I understand that "kits" with motion sensors and particular rifles were regarded as unbalanced so it also occurs to me that you could assign a point-value to each weapon/bit of gear and then have an optional per-team or per-player limit.

More options = Better.

More variety = Better.

It goes without saying that keeping it nice and easy to add new weapons ingame would be a good idea.

[baff6]

Originally posted by Delta_Hoot:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by no_limits:
can't beat the SA80

You do know that the actual SA-80 is a real piece of shiat? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Was a piece of shiat. (In comparision to it's predessecor the SLR).

It's reliability is currently only surpassed by Kalashinkov's.

Compare it's operational performance to say the M4 or Minime in operation Anaconda in Afghanistan.

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/SA80.htm



For Kit selection I like the Hidden and Dangerous method, where you can choose you kit and loadout from available in theatre options depending on your armies nationality.

The only restrictions being the weight a man can carry and scenario availablity.

[baff6]

Originally posted by GabRaz1981:
I don't know, I'm not to keen on seeing stuff that don't belong in SOCOMs arsenal,

I'm not intrested in playing a SOCOM game.
I hope Ghost Recon sticks to it's original formula of a multinational Nato force.

the last thing the world needs is another Americas Army game.

[WhiteKnight77]

Originally posted by baff6:
I'm not intrested in playing a SOCOM game.
I hope Ghost Recon sticks to it's original formula of a multinational Nato force.

the last thing the world needs is another Americas Army game.

Now see, you have no idea about the Ghosts.

5ths SFG, a real unit at Ft. Cambell, KY is the basis of GR. There are people from other countries attached to the Ghosts. If you notice, it's only a few specialists that are from other countries, but they are attached to a US Army unit and not part of a multi-national force.


Just out of curiosity, how long have you been playing any version of GR and which version? Have you even graduated high school yet? You quote operations you have read about, yet do not have any real experience with the military from the looks of things.

[Albericht]

(just a litle off topic, do anyone known wich wepon in the act of war game, the task force talon comando are using ?)

[baff6]

Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by baff6:
I'm not intrested in playing a SOCOM game.
I hope Ghost Recon sticks to it's original formula of a multinational Nato force.

the last thing the world needs is another Americas Army game.

Now see, you have no idea about the Ghosts.

5ths SFG, a real unit at Ft. Cambell, KY is the basis of GR. There are people from other countries attached to the Ghosts. If you notice, it's only a few specialists that are from other countries, but they are attached to a US Army unit and not part of a multi-national force.


Just out of curiosity, how long have you been playing any version of GR and which version? Have you even graduated high school yet? You quote operations you have read about, yet do not have any real experience with the military from the looks of things. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I clearly wasn't playing the same version of Ghost Recon as you were.

In the version I played The ghosts were an Elite NATO unit, comprised from specialists from various armies around the world, including America. It wasn't a real unit of SOCOM's, it was a video game.

I haven't graduated any High School.
And no, neither my dad nor my older brother was a soldier.
Is that what you want to do when you graduate?
I thought that people who graduated didn't need to join the army.

[WhiteKnight77]

Here is what my GR for PC box states (I actually have 2 of them, not counting the boxes for DS and IT):


War has broken out on the borders of Russia and the fate of the world hangs in the balance. That's when the call goes out for the Ghosts - an elite handful of specially trained Green Berets, armed with the latest technology and trained to use the deadliest weapons. Their mission: Spearhead the way for a NATO peacekeeping mission force, and keep the lid on the conflict before it mushrroms...literally.

First, the Green Berets are a US Army unit and while D Co. in 1st Bn. may not exist, but 1st Bn. 5th SFG does exist. This page at Global Security details the 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne) (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/5sfg.htm) history. I know someone who was with them and is an instructor at the SF school at Ft. Bragg and also is consulting with RSE on GR related subjects.


The 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne) added to its rich combat history during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. In August 1990 the Group was called upon to conduct theater operations in Southwest Asia in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. During this crisis the Army's First Special Operations Task Force, (ARSOTF), consisting of elements of the 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne) comprising 106 special operations teams performing a myriad of missions that spanned the scope of operations: support to coalition warfare; conducting foreign internal defense missions with Saudi Arabian Land Forces, performing special reconnaissance, border surveillance, direct action, combat search and rescue missions; and advising and assisting a pan-Arab equivalent force larger than six U.S. divisions, as well as conducting civil-military operations training and liaison with the Kuwaitis. The border surveillance mission assigned the 5th Special Forces was among the most vital in providing "ground truth" to the American and Pan Arab Forces. A new chapter in coalition warfare was written while new military relationships were forged which continue their importance today.

Notice, not everythng is direct action as I said before, most of it is quite boring.


Something else, you better have a diploma to join any branch of the military or at least a GED. they don't want uneducated arses filling their ranks.

As you stated, you weren't playing the GR that I or the rest of us were playing if you had a multi-national elite NATO unit.

[GabRaz1981]

I don't remeber any mention of NATO (had to save the UN once though) in the original GR, it was 5th SF all the way, with the occasional NATO member to spice things up, but I found that distracting as it wouldn't allow me to upgrade the stats of the all the soldiers I had started with. I'd just get the guy with the OICW after the first mission and that would be it.

RS was a NATO oriented theme (in the game and the book)

[baff6]

nor do I especially.
I think I was confused between that and Rainbow, however the bloke was flaming , I thought I'd wind him up some more.


As for the Gr you were playing, that was the one with no Urban or CQB areas, right?
Oh and GR is an elite multinational Nato unit. Except for the Green berets parts, who are only veteran.

Being a SOCOM game is still the last thing the world needs, they might want to tailor that a bit for the next release.
I know someone who consults with UBI on GR related subjects too. And he says,

"The American Army is about as popular as the S.S. it will hurt sales".



Something else, you better have a diploma to join any branch of the military or at least a GED. they don't want uneducated arses filling their ranks.

A diploma in what, from whom? Last Diploma I got took 4 days and cost â£100.
Whats a GED? Is that like "graduating" from high school?
1 word
SQUADDIE


Out of intrest at what age does the U.S. army accept recruits?
Here it's 17 I think.


I found Dieter Munz and the bazooka guy to be my main soldiers. Their stats start higher, so even though they come into the campaign late they are still better developed.

[GabRaz1981]

I don't get what's so hard to understand, from the horse's mouth (Ubi):

"For one small group of elite soldiers, the war has already begun: U.S. Special Forces Group 5, First Battalion, D Company. Deployed on peacekeping duty to the Republic of Georgia in the Caucasus, this handful of Green Berets represents the very tip of the spear - the first line of defense. Equipped with the latest battlefield technology, and trained in the latest techniques of covert warfare, they strike - swiftly, silently, and invisibly.
They call themselves "The Ghosts""


Now last I checked as of the 21st of July 2005 the 5th SFG is still part of SOCOM and under their jurisdiction. Maybe because they're deployed on a peace-keeping mission in the Eastern Europe (well the Caucasus at least), one would assume they'd be in contact with other NATO units, maybe have one tag along for a while or two.

But in GRAW the action is in Mexico, while I'm not sure what the plot line is, there's no indication that NATO has anything to do with it this time (it could well be that we evil americans acted unilaterally this time). And if I'm not mistaken the 4 man team stays the same the whole time. I still stand by my opinion that the weapons loadout should be limited to official and semi-official weapons of SOCOM and the US ARMY, along with anything they pick up in Mexico (G-3s and whatnot).



And frankly I couldn't care one iota what the rest of the world thinks of the US military.

[WhiteKnight77]

Show me were I flamed you. I simply stated that you have no idea about the Ghosts and gave you actual facts about who the game was based on, even if the particular Company they are assigned to is ficticous.

I asked if you even graduated high school and stated that you didn't have any real military experience, not a flame and by your own admission, correct.

You, yourself stated we were playing different games and continue to do so with this statement:


Oh and GR is an elite multinational Nato unit.

I agreed with you and stated that the others around here play the same game I do and GabRaz1981 confirms it. That is in no way a flame either.

The US military wants a person to have at least a high school diploma or equivelant (GED) before joining the military. Yes a person 17 can join the military here in the States, with parental permission.

If you want a multinational elite force and not just US Army squads in a game, by all means stop playing GR and find something else that fits your bill. Maybe you can talk a dev into creating one that uses bayonet charges as a means of attack. It may sell, then again, it may sit on the shelf. GR2 still used members of the 5th SFG even though it was only 4 members this time instead of a squad of 6 as in the original, GR3 carries on in that way. There will be no allies attached to the squad from the looks of things.

[baff6]

asked if you even graduated high school and stated that you didn't have any real military experience, not a flame and by your own admission, correct.

Likewise if i was to say "were you born a spastic?"

That would not be a flame but a geniune question asked out of intrest related to the subject matter. It would be a mistake for you to read any sense of my personal contempt for you into that sentence.

[baff6]

Originally posted by GabRaz1981:
I don't get what's so hard to understand, from the horse's mouth (Ubi):

"For one small group of elite soldiers, the war has already begun: U.S. Special Forces Group 5, First Battalion, D Company. Deployed on peacekeping duty to the Republic of Georgia in the Caucasus, this handful of Green Berets represents the very tip of the spear - the first line of defense. Equipped with the latest battlefield technology, and trained in the latest techniques of covert warfare, they strike - swiftly, silently, and invisibly.
They call themselves "The Ghosts""


Now last I checked as of the 21st of July 2005 the 5th SFG is still part of SOCOM and under their jurisdiction. Maybe because they're deployed on a peace-keeping mission in the Eastern Europe (well the Caucasus at least), one would assume they'd be in contact with other NATO units, maybe have one tag along for a while or two.

But in GRAW the action is in Mexico, while I'm not sure what the plot line is, there's no indication that NATO has anything to do with it this time (it could well be that we evil americans acted unilaterally this time). And if I'm not mistaken the 4 man team stays the same the whole time. I still stand by my opinion that the weapons loadout should be limited to official and semi-official weapons of SOCOM and the US ARMY, along with anything they pick up in Mexico (G-3s and whatnot).



And frankly I couldn't care one iota what the rest of the world thinks of the US military.

No worries matey I see no reason that you should care what people think about the U.S. military.
But then, you're not trying to sell the game.

Localisation is a method used to tailor the same product to a different market, so for example to U.S. buyers we might advertise it as a U.S. shooter game and print that on the covers, and hype up it's U.S. military cred in all the press releases, but in Europe we might might play rather more towards the NATO aspect.

Further to this, we might include playable characters from the major games buying nations around the world, in order to add attraction fpr those people.

This has been a standard RSE/Tom Clancy games formula.

Since the Dominant markets for PC games and Console games, are alternatively Europe and the U.S.A it might even be possible to have seperate scenarios for each version.
What is socially acceptable in the U.S. is not in Europe, and vicversa.

Certainly to design a PC game without relevance to it's prime audience is not the smartest in marketing practise.



Sales practise aside,
I'm saddened to hear that Ghost Recon will be an American only game.
How very uninspired. As I've mentioned in other threads I feel innovation and originality is something I look for in video games.
Yet another American soldier game really brings neither to the Genre.
What I enjoy most about ghost Recon is not the nationality of it's heroes, or villians, but the style of the gameplay.

To play the same old tired role of yet another American soldier is just another dull uninspired vacuous waste of a plot.
The option to bring something new, squandered.

How about the enemies are Ghost Recon?
Or the expansion Pack plays through the same scenario from the otherside like in Operation flashpoint? Or even better have both campaigns in the same game.


But mainly if they want it to sell as well as it could they need to play to the crowd.
The PC game crowd aren't fond of U.S. Soldiers.
If they are no options to play as something else it will cost it sales. The Fantasy is wrong.

By the way, that's all it is. A fantasy.

[WhiteKnight77]

The original GR sold pretty darned good world wide (something like 8 milllion copies so far) considering it is based on a US Army Spec Ops unit. I don't see the fact that a US companies game, based on a US Army unit had any effect on how well it sold.

As I said earlier, if you don't wish to play a US companies game, based on a US military outfit, find a dev who will create on based on a unit you prefer.

[GabRaz1981]

To play the same old tired role of yet another American soldier is just another dull uninspired vacuous waste of a plot.
The option to bring something new, squandered.

Then play something else, 'cause I think it's too late to complain. But also expect more of the same with OpF2, BiA's stand alone expansion, FSW: Ten Hammers, and so on.....

And there's something else, almost everybody here clamours for realism, well I find it unrealistic to have 2 or 3 NATO members from different countries in your squad of 6 (I also find the reticle-only view unrealistic as well, but that's another discussion http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif), now with squads of 4 it's just too much.

The only reason Rainbow Six had NATO members is because Tom Clancy wrote the book that way (which reminds me, most of his other books the US acts unilaterally against the Iranians or the Japanese for example), otherwise it could just as well have been a Delta Force type unit. Your only way out of this is to appeal to developers to start work on multi-national forces; if you really don't want Americans in them either then howbout a game of the European Rapid Reaction Force? You shouldn't complain to us, try asking Illusion Softworks for H&D3 where it's the modern SAS. U'd have more chance if someone developed the game version of Red Storm Rising (but that would be massive).

[baff6]

Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:
The original GR sold pretty darned good world wide (something like 8 milllion copies so far) considering it is based on a US Army Spec Ops unit. I don't see the fact that a US companies game, based on a US Army unit had any effect on how well it sold.

As I said earlier, if you don't wish to play a US companies game, based on a US military outfit, find a dev who will create on based on a unit you prefer.

Yes it did, but it sold in a period of history when American soldiers were generally well liked around the globe.

It also sold in a time when the U.S. was the prime buyer of PC games.

Things change.


With regards to playing something else or finding a dev to include non U.S.units, I assume this is a feedback forum?
Or are you telling me this game has been finished already?



For the record, neither GRIN nor UBISOFT are U.S. companies. Ubisoft is French and Grin is swedish.

[baff6]

Originally posted by GabRaz1981:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">To play the same old tired role of yet another American soldier is just another dull uninspired vacuous waste of a plot.
The option to bring something new, squandered.

Then play something else, 'cause I think it's too late to complain. But also expect more of the same with OpF2, BiA's stand alone expansion, FSW: Ten Hammers, and so on.....

And there's something else, almost everybody here clamours for realism, well I find it unrealistic to have 2 or 3 NATO members from different countries in your squad of 6 (I also find the reticle-only view unrealistic as well, but that's another discussion http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif), now with squads of 4 it's just too much.

The only reason Rainbow Six had NATO members is because Tom Clancy wrote the book that way (which reminds me, most of his other books the US acts unilaterally against the Iranians or the Japanese for example), otherwise it could just as well have been a Delta Force type unit. Your only way out of this is to appeal to developers to start work on multi-national forces; if you really don't want Americans in them either then howbout a game of the European Rapid Reaction Force? You shouldn't complain to us, try asking Illusion Softworks for H&D3 where it's the modern SAS. U'd have more chance if someone developed the game version of Red Storm Rising (but that would be massive). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

HD3 is called "Enemy in sight" It's a cold war game.
I fully suspect it will include more unit nationalites than just Russians and Americans.

You might note that on the subject of H&D, American Uniforms and equipment were selectable, even though historically they were not to be found on the given battlefields at the time.
The game prided itself on Historical accuracy.
But it's still got to sell units.

At the end of the day. Sales counts.
Plots can be re written very quickly.

While the R6 series may have hit on it's formula for international success by accident, or even Clancy's genius, the formula works and has been repeated.
It is not important why the team is multi-national, only that it is.

I'm not complaining to you gaz, I am discussing what I would like to see in a future video game and making suggestions as per what this forum is for.

As with the poster above, it's very kind of you to tell me exactly whats in the new game and exactly what isn't, but...
I don't beleive you know.

Unless you are the lead developer and you are telling me now that you do not intend to approve this, and the Marketing dept at Ubisoft have OKed this.

Realism.
The realism of "Tom clancy games" doesn't come from the plot.
The plot is fantasy.

It's written in five minutes on the back of a matchbook down the pub.


OPF broke the mold by allowing you to play as both Russians and Americans.
I see no reason why they would suddenly change that element now, particularly after so many national forces have been modded into the game and it is obvious there is a demand.

FSW didn't sell well in Europe.
But since its a game about America Marines in Iraq, it's not really a massive surprise is it?

No one cares about the expansion, that won't sell well abroad either.

BIA didn't fare much better.

They still sold, but other games, H&D2 included, sold better. Much better.

In the case of BIA and and FSW, those two games are first and foremost console games, primarily released for the X-box market. The bulk of all console games are sold in the U.S., this is their primary target audience.
Similary, while Ghost Recon 2 sold well in the U.S. it bombed in Europe.

Any PC game solely targeted at the U.S. market will underperform.

[GabRaz1981]

You might note that on the subject of H&D, American Uniforms and equipment were selectable, even though historically they were not to be found on the given battlefields at the time.

American Uniforms were not used in HD2s campaign (not multi-player), only Brit and German uniforms were selectable (and that depending on the mission); American weapons were present in the game because they were present in the field, and were used by the SAS.



Unless you are the lead developer and you are telling me now that you do not intend to approve this, and the Marketing dept at Ubisoft have OKed this.

And Ubisoft have mentioned nothing of multi-national forces, considering the emphasis is on the Future Force Warrior I doubt we will be seeing any other form of equipment. Additionally considering the action is taking place in Mexico, there is little chance that a European nation (with it's limited deployment capabilities) would participate, now if u said Nicaraguans or Ecuadorians or Cubans or even to the extreme of French Guyanians (sorry bout the spelling) I'd be inclinded to agree on their presence.



Realism.
The realism of "Tom clancy games" doesn't come from the plot.
The plot is fantasy.

True, but in this case u're talking about a team of men that actually do EXIST in real life not some make-belief pan-NATO anti-terror unit from a book or some super spy for the NSA.



Look give it a rest, who cares if there are no Brits, Germans, or French (singleplayer wise, do whatever you want in multiplayer). In my case I'm looking forward to GRAW in the hopes that it will be as realistic a portrayal of Future Force Warrior equipment as possible.

And considering compatibility issues between the various future warrior programs of Europe and that of the US, I can only imagine a European being "part" of the Ghosts by wearing their equipment and carrying SOCOM issued weapons.

BTW OfP didn't let u play the russians until the expansions, all 3 of OFP 2s player characters will be Americans, and the setting middle-eastern.

[Prozac360]

The plot has always been losely based on possible current or upcoming events.

GR3 is the first one iv seen step way out of line with something that seems ( at first glance ) to have no real world conflict base.

Either way most of what I have read in this thread so far is pointless... Ask a stupid question get told a smart answer (thanks white knight and gab http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif )

[WhiteKnight77]

Man, you have no idea about games. You confuse parts of games with something else and get some games all wrong.

I won't go into H&D, but if I remember right, OFP was a game pitting both cold war superpower enemies against each other and is an all out combat game. So what if it was just the Russians and the Americans to begin with. Even though user made mods added other forces (the same thing was done with GR), the game still was designed as it was. Just becasue modders add something different to the game, doesn't mean devs have to add those very same things that modders do.

BIA (Brothers In Arms) is based on an operation by some of the US Army's 101st Airborne Division during WW2. Another game developed by a US development house. Available on all platforms, not just consoles.

Full Spectrum Warrior by Pandemic Stuidos (another US company) features a US Army (not Marines) outfit given the go ahead by the UN to depose a dictator in ficticous Zekistan (not Iraq). FSW is a strategy game and not a FPS. You play the leader and order the how the men move from place to place and where to attack on the way to the objective. It too is a game released on all platforms, not just console.

Ubi may be French in ownership, but they have offices worldwide, including San Francisco, CA not counting RSE in Morriseville, NC (not very far from Ft. Bragg where a certain SF instructer is stationed).

As said previously, see if you can talk a dev into designing a game you would rather have. If they bite and develop it, good on you, but as it stands, Tom Clancy games based on US personnel and agencies have sold 20.5 million copies world wide (these figures do not include the Rainbow Six series of another 12 million units).

Weapons wise, you will see weapons that SF are using or will be using shortly (that SF instructor, just took some goodies to VA for RSE to shoot in June). Right now, GR2 has been in development at least a year. For XBox, a lot longer. At this point in time, it is to late to change the plot, location or much of anythng. Some things have yet to be finalized, but for the most part, the game is almost done, after all, it is within 5 months of release.

If you don't like the units or the weapons or the settings, don't buy the game and go play something to your liking.

[MSgt.Ant]

Originally posted by Delta_Hoot:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:
One has to realize that the US military rarely uses weapons such as the P90 or the FAL. Point is, you will see people carrying M16s, M4, in some cases SF carry MP5s (I posted a picture around here somewhere), along with M24 and M82 sniper rifles. Why does everyone keep asking for weapons not in use by the US military? For mods, make what ever and create skins for characters to use 'em.



One has to realize that the US military rarely uses weapons such as the P90 or the FAL.

Yeah, i know that. But the Ghosts are U.S FICTIONAL elite soldiers, so i see no problem whatsoever in adding a new flavor to the game just for the sake of it.

GR1 also had FALs, SA80 and other weapons not COMMONLY used by U.S Special too. But it was very nice to have the option to choose them.

However, i have to diseagree with on one thing: U.S do use uncommon weapons too, they choose wathever they want to. Green Beretts are often found using soviet, western european or serbian guns in Iraq. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Delta Hoot is right about this, the special forces do prefer to use former soviet, serbian, and others thats in the Kalashnikov class of weapons due to the fact that they are very reliable and very low maintence required, and they wont get jammed like Colts M-16 and its varients. Me, personally, i do prefer Kalashnikov rifles over Colts AR.

[WhiteKnight77]

Originally posted by MSgt.Ant:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Delta_Hoot:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:
One has to realize that the US military rarely uses weapons such as the P90 or the FAL. Point is, you will see people carrying M16s, M4, in some cases SF carry MP5s (I posted a picture around here somewhere), along with M24 and M82 sniper rifles. Why does everyone keep asking for weapons not in use by the US military? For mods, make what ever and create skins for characters to use 'em.



One has to realize that the US military rarely uses weapons such as the P90 or the FAL.

Yeah, i know that. But the Ghosts are U.S FICTIONAL elite soldiers, so i see no problem whatsoever in adding a new flavor to the game just for the sake of it.

GR1 also had FALs, SA80 and other weapons not COMMONLY used by U.S Special too. But it was very nice to have the option to choose them.

However, i have to diseagree with on one thing: U.S do use uncommon weapons too, they choose wathever they want to. Green Beretts are often found using soviet, western european or serbian guns in Iraq. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Delta Hoot is right about this, the special forces do prefer to use former soviet, serbian, and others thats in the Kalashnikov class of weapons due to the fact that they are very reliable and very low maintence required, and they wont get jammed like Colts M-16 and its varients. Me, personally, i do prefer Kalashnikov rifles over Colts AR. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You may want to check out other posts around here and even on the console forum where an SF operator has posted about weapons they are currently using and evaluating.

[Albericht]

And you may give us the link to this fantastic post :P
Like this one (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3291043913/m/6341057043)

By the way, got an idea, why not include all these weapons (scar m8 ...), no not the tomatoe ! *fleeee*

[baff6]

American Uniforms were not used in HD2s campaign (not multi-player), only Brit and German uniforms were selectable (and that depending on the mission); American weapons were present in the game because they were present in the field, and were used by the SAS.

No they were not present in the field.
America didn't even join the War until 1941.

The SAS used Garands? No.
The SAS used Springfields? No.
The SAS used U.S. Carbines No.
the SAS used Bazookas? No.
Did they use Thompsons? Yes. Thompsons were built under lisence in the U.k.

You are perhaps ill informed, neither the S.A.S. did, nor did the Commandoes. (early missions in H&D2 are commando missions the S.A.S. are not formed at this time.



Look give it a rest, who cares if there are no Brits, Germans, or French (singleplayer wise, do whatever you want in multiplayer). In my case I'm looking forward to GRAW in the hopes that it will be as realistic a portrayal of Future Force Warrior equipment as possible.

The shareholders, the publishers and the sales teams, not to mention the Brits, Germans and French. (Who, between them all, buy about twice the number of PC games yearly as N.America combined).

Like wise I might say who cares if there are no Americans in the game. You could drop the U.S. element completely and still sell more.

To be an accurate simulation of modern combat gear doesn't mean it has to be U.S. combat gear.
I see no reason why it shouldn't be, the previous game, however, was much more.
I hope to see Ghost Recon continue in the same vein that brought it so much success before, of not improve on it.

I think we're all looking forward to the game being as good a simulation as possible. Tailoring solely to the American market would be a mistake for the PC market. (and fine for the Xbox).





I won't go into H&D, but if I remember right, OFP was a game pitting both cold war superpower enemies against each other and is an all out combat game. So what if it was just the Russians and the Americans to begin with. Even though user made mods added other forces (the same thing was done with GR), the game still was designed as it was. Just becasue modders add something different to the game, doesn't mean devs have to add those very same things that modders do.
BIS have developed a very close relationship thier fanbase. They are aware of what their customers wish to play, because their customers have shown them time and time again.


BIA (Brothers In Arms) is based on an operation by some of the US Army's 101st Airborne Division during WW2. Another game developed by a US development house. Available on all platforms, not just consoles.

Full Spectrum Warrior by Pandemic Stuidos (another US company) features a US Army (not Marines) outfit given the go ahead by the UN to depose a dictator in ficticous Zekistan (not Iraq). FSW is a strategy game and not a FPS. You play the leader and order the how the men move from place to place and where to attack on the way to the objective. It too is a game released on all platforms, not just console

and neither of them sold well outside of the U.S.
Kmnowing what the game is about or who made it, doesn't make it sell well.

These games were developed for Xbox and ported to other platforms. where, the pc version, in a market dominated by European sales, bombed.

The problems with these specific game was not the nationality of manufacture (The Sims still sold very well in this time period), but the subject matter and platform. Neither of Which had an enormous appeal in the European market.


Ubi may be French in ownership, but they have offices worldwide, including San Francisco, CA not counting RSE in Morriseville, NC (not very far from Ft. Bragg where a certain SF instructer is stationed).

which means they are not American.
How does fort brag have anything to do with me somehow wanting to boycot American companies, (which aren't even American?)

You can mention special forces in as many sentences as you like. I'm a video game player not a wannabe soldier. RSE are not making the PC version.



As said previously, see if you can talk a dev into designing a game you would rather have. If they bite and develop it, good on you, but as it stands, Tom Clancy games based on US personnel and agencies have sold 20.5 million copies world wide (these figures do not include the Rainbow Six series of another 12 million units).
Since we're in the business of repeating ourselves,

This forum is the feedback forum for the game development of the next pc version of ghost recon.
This is the place to come to talk to the developers.


I consult with many developers bosses with regards to sales requirements for a number of different games houses and publishers. Ubisoft U.K. was amongst my clients for it's Ghost recon Island thunder and Ravenshield releases.

The above mentioned Tom clancy games did not sell so well by ignoring the core markets.
The Formula of integrated US and EU forces has been a working theme throughout many of them, including the games previous PC title, Ghost Recon.
And....
again at the risk of repeating myself rainbow six games weren't U.S. agencies they were Nato, Personnel and equipment was not simply American personel and equipment. This is your personal fantasy, not the fantasy sold in the games.


Right now, GR2 has been in development at least a year. For XBox, a lot longer. At this point in time, it is to late to change the plot, location or much of anythng. Some things have yet to be finalized, but for the most part, the game is almost done, after all, it is within 5 months of release.

Sorry if I didn't make it clear but I am refering to the PC version only.
As previously stated, an all American Xbox game would be playing to the correct market. Xbox is dominated by U.S. sales and with the exception of Great Britain has a minimal presence in Europe.

I'm not aware that PC development has been going on for this game for over a year, only a very few months was my impression.
they had previously planned to port Ghost recon 2 for the Xbox but those plans were shelved due to very poor community feedback.
Grin are making an entirely seperate games development from the Xbox. It may or may not loosley (or even precisely) contain the same themes or scenarios. We shall have to see.

I haven't seen any press releases about the content of the PC version. If you have, then you know more than me.


If you don't like the units or the weapons or the settings, don't buy the game and go play something to your liking.

I couldn't buy it, even if I tried. It hasn't been made.

Likewise if you feel the end result is not going to be true to life all American action warrior for you, or that pandering to foreign influences destroys any sense of realism for you, don't buy it. No one is going to force you.

Or you could just stick with the Xbox version.

[baff6]

Originally posted by Prozac360:
The plot has always been losely based on possible current or upcoming events.

GR3 is the first one iv seen step way out of line with something that seems ( at first glance ) to have no real world conflict base.

Either way most of what I have read in this thread so far is pointless... Ask a stupid question get told a smart answer (thanks white knight and gab http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif )

LMAO
What exactly is so loosely possible about U.S./NATO soldiers having a gun battle in Red square?

Presuambly the thought of Soviet Spetnatz blowing up tanks outside of the White House in Washington to save America from islamic terrorism is another scenario whose realism you wouldn't blink at.


American soldiers in Mexico is WAY more believable than that junk.
In fact ANY nations soldiers in Mexico is WAY more believable than that junk.
As I said, plot written on the back of a match book down the pub.

This whole "it's a real bunch of soldiers nonsense" is too much.
The Ghosts are a fictional unit, they did not rescue Moscow in 2008.
They do not exist.
It's a video game, it's not real. It hasn't happened.

We can pretend that the are based on a real bunch of people, but they are not.
It's science fiction.

We can substitute any fantasy we like as for the unit names, regiments, soldier names and scenario plots, the important part is the core infantry simulation.
It still never happened. It never will.

Since we can, and the game play will remain true, we should.
There will always be people like the posters above who cannot or do not wish to, disassocociate the game with reality.
Therefore the fantasy should be tailored to the maximum cross section of these people. (Not just the minority of Americans), in order to sell it top them.

[NYR_32]

Dude give it a rest already. The ghosts and Ghost Recon, is/are based on US Special Forces, if you want a game with a multinational theme, play R6. Both franchices sell well enough that they have sequels in the pipeline. End of story, there is nothing to debate.

[EasyCo]

Originally posted by NYR_32:
Dude give it a rest already. The ghosts and Ghost Recon, is/are based on US Special Forces, if you want a game with a multinational theme, play R6. Both franchices sell well enough that they have sequels in the pipeline. End of story, there is nothing to debate.
^Ditto

[CDN_Angus]

Who cares anyways, they are just a couple of cartoon dudes moving around on a screen anyways.

[WhiteKnight77]

I was talking about GR3 and not GR2 when I was refering to being in the pipleline for at least a year now. At the time of it's cancelation GR2 had been in development for over a year, close to 18 months.

I at least know my games unlike you. Give it up, guy, you came here thinking you know RSE games (a studio started and owned by a US author on US soil), yet you don't know a thing really.

My colleague at GR.net is right, give it a rest. You are in a losing battle.

[AlphaDelta219]

I just hope we can customize our guns and then be able to keep them set up a certain way like in AA how u can just pick a certain set to save time.

[kainite]

Geez! Read what the guy has to say before you sit your a**es down right in his face. I for one think baff6 has some good points (and has got a lot of facts straight too). If you don't agree with him argument in a civil way, not by taking that superior attitude. It makes intelligent people (like me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif) loose respect for you. And furthermore it just isn't nice. Go back and read, baff6 didn't start being impolite. He was met by this attitude that some of you really, REALLY, should drop right away.

Peace.

[Albericht]

The initial subject wasn't the weapon ?

Perhaps you are a bit offtopic for the moment.