View Full Version : Questions Answered..................
XyZspineZyX
05-18-2005, 02:18 PM
This Info straight from E3
On which platforms will Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3 be available?
Next-generation console from Microsoft, Xbox, PS2, GC, PC
When will the games Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3 be available?
The Xbox, PS2, GC and PC versions will be available for the 2005 holiday season, and the version for the next-generation console from Microsoft will be available for the machine's launch.
STORYLINE
What is the storyline?
Mexico D.F. (Districto Federal), Mexico: The Ghosts have been ordered to participate in a Joint Operation designed to capture Mexican military officials engaged in illegal technology sales to Columbian rebels.
The US President has joined the Canadian Prime Minister and the Mexican President in Mexico City to sign NAJSA (the North American Joint Security Agreement), a new policy designed to share the policing responsibilities along the borders of these three countries and control illegal immigration and the movement of drugs and terrorists in the hemisphere.
As a symbolic gesture a number of US military weapons and vehicles have been sold to the Mexican Government and are now situated at the Mexican Whitehouse - Chapultepec castle.
During the public signing of the document the three leaders are attacked by Mexican soldiers opposed to what they consider an unreasonable concentration of military power in civilian hands (and even worse, in politicians' hands).
The Ghosts, as the only US Special Forces on the ground, are ordered to meet up with Secret Service agents protecting the US President and ensure his safety until he is extracted. While the US president is on route to the Airport, the Ghosts secure the Mexican president. Thanks to the Ghosts actions, the Mexican President will "Green light" US intervention on Mexican soil in order to re-establish Democracy.
Unfortunately, the US president never reached the Airport and is now in enemy hands. The Ghosts must now hunt down his captors in a war-torn Mexico City and fight off a well-equipped Mexican force.
Where / when does it take place?
Mexico City 2013
Will newcomers to the franchise be able to understand the storyline?
Yes, the game design has been written to allow the player to develop with the game. The idea is to immediately immerse the player and let him pick up his pad and be part of the experience. The first mission puts you into character and allows you to familiarize yourself with the Cross Com system and how it will assist the gameplay. Basically you are given the chance to accustom yourself to the controls before all hell breaks loose!
Mexico is the set of this episode. How did you recreate the look and feel of the city?
We spent a number of months researching areas for the Ghosts to enter and to ensure the environment was as realistic as possible. The desert, Vietnam, Irak has been done over and over, so we went looking for Urban warfare with scope, hence Mexico. The traditional vision of Mexico might be of sombreros, cigars and donkeys, but Mexico City itself is enormous and has diverse locations within the city limits, allowing us to really explore Urban warfare. There are over 20 million people in Mexico City, and with its border being linked to the US it makes the threat more realistic.
How many levels and missions?
12 single player missions, with an average of 6 sub missions within each; 7-15 additional multiplayer levels.
Length of the game?
Single player - 20 hours.
CHARACTERS
Who do you embody?
Major Scott Mitchell, Leader of the Ghosts
Who are the Ghosts?
In an era when the United States is the only global superpower, the U.S. Army needs an elite group of soldiers who can be put in the field immediately, anywhere in the world. The point of the spear in every operation, U.S. Special Forces Group 5, First Battalion, D Company is an elite Green Beret unit made up of the best of the best. First into any conflict and last to retreat, they handle the missions that no one else can. Often inserted deep behind enemy lines, they strike swiftly and suddenly, and then vanish. They are the quiet professionals; they call themselves the "Ghosts".
Will the player be able to play different characters?
He or she will only take on the role of Major Mitchell.
Who are the main characters?
Major Scott Mitchell, Sergeant Joe Ramirez, General Keating, General Steve Martin, Blackhawk Co-Pilot Bud Aldridge, The President of the United States.
Who are the main enemies in this new opus?
General Luis Ontiveros, Carlos Ontiveros, Former US General James Munro
GAMEPLAY AND GAME DESIGN
Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 2 shifted its game design from a 100% tactical shooter to a more action-based game in order to broaden the audience. Fans of the original Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® questioned this shift. What kind of game can we expect with Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3?
We are keeping the realism that the core fan base has loved since the original Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ®, but we are looking to give the game a huge boost with the help of next generation technology in terms of immersive gameplay. In terms of tactical gameplay, you now have intel from unmanned drones which you control, you can call in Apache Air strikes which will work in conjunction with your team. You order your team to move in on enemy positions. The vision of the Integrated Warfighter System is that you now have situational awareness on the battlefield near, mid and far range.
Can you give us some hints about the directions and decisions you took in the game design/gameplay in Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3?
The biggest feature of Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3 will be the Cross Com system: you will receive information, news reports, briefings, and interact with your troops on the ground, all while you are carrying out missions.
What is the game engine for the next-gen version?
YETI, a Ubisoft proprietary engine built especially for next-gen consoles
Can we expect any new gameplay features like new abilities for the Ghosts?
The "Cross-Com" communication device is the biggest new feature for the Ghosts. This device is powered by satellite technology and gives the ghosts full visibility and command of the battlefield.
What new weapons and devices are available to the player to execute the mission?
The Ghosts will be decked out with next-generation military technology. Their weapons, communication systems, and combat suit will feature an unprecedented level of technology for a military shooter.
How will the player be able to communicate and interact with his team?
See Cross Com
MODES
What kind of missions will there be? In SP and in MP?
Campaign (12 Missions): Solo & 2-Player Co-Op Split Screen
Campaign (12 Missions): 3 to 4 Player Co-Op Online
Quick Missions (replay each Campaign Mission with your own rule set): 1 to 4 Player Co-Op
Tutorial embedded in Game
Downloadable Solo/ Co-Op Maps
Can you give details on the various online features available?
Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3 will expand on both Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 2 online & online features of other Clancy games bringing back what fans loved while offering new twists and innovations.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PLATFORMS
Are there going to be any differences among platforms in terms of features and exclusive content in terms of:
Gameplay:
PC gameplay will be altered to suit the PC audience. Tactical and strategic elements will be added to create an experience more similar to the original Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® PC title which garnered Game of the Year awards from IGN and PC Gamer.
Graphics:
Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3 will push each system to its graphical limits. Obviously, the next generation console from Microsoft and PC versions will feature the strongest graphical technology, but the current-gen versions will be at the height of the standards for their respective platforms.
Storyline:
All versions will have the same storyline.
Engine:
To optimize each version the most appropriate engine will be chosen for each platform. Next-generation console from Microsoft & PC will run on 2 different engines; Xbox and PS2 will use the same engine as the platforms are more similar.
XyZspineZyX
05-18-2005, 02:18 PM
This Info straight from E3
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">On which platforms will Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3 be available?
Next-generation console from Microsoft, Xbox, PS2, GC, PC
When will the games Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3 be available?
The Xbox, PS2, GC and PC versions will be available for the 2005 holiday season, and the version for the next-generation console from Microsoft will be available for the machine's launch.
STORYLINE
What is the storyline?
Mexico D.F. (Districto Federal), Mexico: The Ghosts have been ordered to participate in a Joint Operation designed to capture Mexican military officials engaged in illegal technology sales to Columbian rebels.
The US President has joined the Canadian Prime Minister and the Mexican President in Mexico City to sign NAJSA (the North American Joint Security Agreement), a new policy designed to share the policing responsibilities along the borders of these three countries and control illegal immigration and the movement of drugs and terrorists in the hemisphere.
As a symbolic gesture a number of US military weapons and vehicles have been sold to the Mexican Government and are now situated at the Mexican Whitehouse - Chapultepec castle.
During the public signing of the document the three leaders are attacked by Mexican soldiers opposed to what they consider an unreasonable concentration of military power in civilian hands (and even worse, in politicians' hands).
The Ghosts, as the only US Special Forces on the ground, are ordered to meet up with Secret Service agents protecting the US President and ensure his safety until he is extracted. While the US president is on route to the Airport, the Ghosts secure the Mexican president. Thanks to the Ghosts actions, the Mexican President will "Green light" US intervention on Mexican soil in order to re-establish Democracy.
Unfortunately, the US president never reached the Airport and is now in enemy hands. The Ghosts must now hunt down his captors in a war-torn Mexico City and fight off a well-equipped Mexican force.
Where / when does it take place?
Mexico City 2013
Will newcomers to the franchise be able to understand the storyline?
Yes, the game design has been written to allow the player to develop with the game. The idea is to immediately immerse the player and let him pick up his pad and be part of the experience. The first mission puts you into character and allows you to familiarize yourself with the Cross Com system and how it will assist the gameplay. Basically you are given the chance to accustom yourself to the controls before all hell breaks loose!
Mexico is the set of this episode. How did you recreate the look and feel of the city?
We spent a number of months researching areas for the Ghosts to enter and to ensure the environment was as realistic as possible. The desert, Vietnam, Irak has been done over and over, so we went looking for Urban warfare with scope, hence Mexico. The traditional vision of Mexico might be of sombreros, cigars and donkeys, but Mexico City itself is enormous and has diverse locations within the city limits, allowing us to really explore Urban warfare. There are over 20 million people in Mexico City, and with its border being linked to the US it makes the threat more realistic.
How many levels and missions?
12 single player missions, with an average of 6 sub missions within each; 7-15 additional multiplayer levels.
Length of the game?
Single player - 20 hours.
CHARACTERS
Who do you embody?
Major Scott Mitchell, Leader of the Ghosts
Who are the Ghosts?
In an era when the United States is the only global superpower, the U.S. Army needs an elite group of soldiers who can be put in the field immediately, anywhere in the world. The point of the spear in every operation, U.S. Special Forces Group 5, First Battalion, D Company is an elite Green Beret unit made up of the best of the best. First into any conflict and last to retreat, they handle the missions that no one else can. Often inserted deep behind enemy lines, they strike swiftly and suddenly, and then vanish. They are the quiet professionals; they call themselves the "Ghosts".
Will the player be able to play different characters?
He or she will only take on the role of Major Mitchell.
Who are the main characters?
Major Scott Mitchell, Sergeant Joe Ramirez, General Keating, General Steve Martin, Blackhawk Co-Pilot Bud Aldridge, The President of the United States.
Who are the main enemies in this new opus?
General Luis Ontiveros, Carlos Ontiveros, Former US General James Munro
GAMEPLAY AND GAME DESIGN
Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 2 shifted its game design from a 100% tactical shooter to a more action-based game in order to broaden the audience. Fans of the original Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® questioned this shift. What kind of game can we expect with Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3?
We are keeping the realism that the core fan base has loved since the original Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ®, but we are looking to give the game a huge boost with the help of next generation technology in terms of immersive gameplay. In terms of tactical gameplay, you now have intel from unmanned drones which you control, you can call in Apache Air strikes which will work in conjunction with your team. You order your team to move in on enemy positions. The vision of the Integrated Warfighter System is that you now have situational awareness on the battlefield near, mid and far range.
Can you give us some hints about the directions and decisions you took in the game design/gameplay in Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3?
The biggest feature of Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3 will be the Cross Com system: you will receive information, news reports, briefings, and interact with your troops on the ground, all while you are carrying out missions.
What is the game engine for the next-gen version?
YETI, a Ubisoft proprietary engine built especially for next-gen consoles
Can we expect any new gameplay features like new abilities for the Ghosts?
The "Cross-Com" communication device is the biggest new feature for the Ghosts. This device is powered by satellite technology and gives the ghosts full visibility and command of the battlefield.
What new weapons and devices are available to the player to execute the mission?
The Ghosts will be decked out with next-generation military technology. Their weapons, communication systems, and combat suit will feature an unprecedented level of technology for a military shooter.
How will the player be able to communicate and interact with his team?
See Cross Com
MODES
What kind of missions will there be? In SP and in MP?
Campaign (12 Missions): Solo & 2-Player Co-Op Split Screen
Campaign (12 Missions): 3 to 4 Player Co-Op Online
Quick Missions (replay each Campaign Mission with your own rule set): 1 to 4 Player Co-Op
Tutorial embedded in Game
Downloadable Solo/ Co-Op Maps
Can you give details on the various online features available?
Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3 will expand on both Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 2 online & online features of other Clancy games bringing back what fans loved while offering new twists and innovations.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PLATFORMS
Are there going to be any differences among platforms in terms of features and exclusive content in terms of:
Gameplay:
PC gameplay will be altered to suit the PC audience. Tactical and strategic elements will be added to create an experience more similar to the original Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® PC title which garnered Game of the Year awards from IGN and PC Gamer.
Graphics:
Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3 will push each system to its graphical limits. Obviously, the next generation console from Microsoft and PC versions will feature the strongest graphical technology, but the current-gen versions will be at the height of the standards for their respective platforms.
Storyline:
All versions will have the same storyline.
Engine:
To optimize each version the most appropriate engine will be chosen for each platform. Next-generation console from Microsoft & PC will run on 2 different engines; Xbox and PS2 will use the same engine as the platforms are more similar.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
silent_strike22
05-18-2005, 04:28 PM
good post, lot of good info in there. now if the game is really tailored to each system then there is some hope for a more tactical game that we've been waiting for. my only problem at the moment is that we are still limited to 4 men and can only control major mitchell.
Ghost_Leader_1
05-19-2005, 05:45 AM
Great post klean! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif
@ silent, I agree. The only other thing that bothers me is this "Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 2 shifted its game design from a 100% tactical shooter to a more action-based game in order to broaden the audience. "
jchung
05-19-2005, 05:55 AM
Thank you Klean, good post as always. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif
The only thing that bothers me is that the PC game will have a more tactical focus? Does that mean that the Xbox version will be more of a run and gun game?
According to honest PC gamers **Ahem** OGR was the same on Xbox and the PC. Now there appears to be a difference that will be made intentionally taking away the tactical aspect of the game for the consoles?
I'll reserve judgement for now, but I can say that I don't think I like what I am hearing. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
Ghost_Leader_1
05-19-2005, 06:12 AM
Yeah it's ALMOST making me want to become a PC gamer and join the dark side. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif
jchung
05-19-2005, 06:44 AM
Hey ghost, don't let Chunk see your post. He might start sending propoganda flyers to your house, and telemarketing you for GR3 on PC. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
On a serious note, I know what you mean. I'm looking for an old PC that I can experiment with to hook up to my TV. Yeah, I really am considering PC gaming, I'll just run it on my TV from my easy chair.
Brainlicker
05-19-2005, 09:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">GAMEPLAY AND GAME DESIGN
Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 2 shifted its game design from a 100% tactical shooter to a more action-based game in order to broaden the audience. Fans of the original Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® questioned this shift. What kind of game can we expect with Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® 3?
We are keeping the realism that the core fan base has loved since the original Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ®, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That just doesn't seem right to me. Of course we questioned it, we were the ones who provided them with the money to keep going. Can you imagine where they would be if OGR and GRIT would have bombed? And as far as the realism...reality is here and now, not in 2013 in which no one knows for sure or not the Army will be fighting wars like that. Again, in my opinion this shouldn't have been labeled a "Ghost Recon" game! It's more of a hybrid between Rainbow6 and Ghost Recon. Great looking game....but it just feels too...I don't know, I guess I'll wait and see.
It may end up being a good game and may have a lot of good points but this isn't what made Ghost Recon a success.
For the love of all that's right in video gaming today
!!!!!PLEASE REDSTORM GIVE US GHOST RECON BACK!!!!!!! and if you can't do that atleast give us something similar......
WhiteKnight77
05-19-2005, 09:34 AM
Yes, I know there are HD TVs out, but how many people actually own one right now? I darn well can't afford one and as I use rabbit ears instead of cable (internet access is my entertainment money and even having a DSL connection, it is cheaper than cable) a regular TVs resoulution is stuck at 640x480. A game that looks great with photorealistic looking textures (GR1 has some, the rubble piles on the Vilnious map are an example) at a resolution of 1024x768 or greater, are gonna look like garbage on a TV, not to mention text of any sort. Sure, PC games can be played on a TV, but do ya really want to look at a nasty picture?
Brainlicker
05-19-2005, 09:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">PC gameplay will be altered to suit the PC audience. Tactical and strategic elements will be added to create an experience more similar to the original Tom Clancy's Ghost Reconâ® PC title which garnered Game of the Year awards from IGN and PC Gamer. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What exactly does this mean? Can anyone be more specific, and what is the reason to not add this element to the console crowd? Are we not to be taken as serious gamers? Is this to say that console gamers aren't as intelligent as PC gamers? I don't understand the reason behind this. Is there something to detrimental to the gameplay that this can't be added as a server option on the 360?
XyZspineZyX
05-19-2005, 09:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brainlicker:
And as far as the realism...reality is here and now, not in 2013 in which no one knows for sure or not the Army will be fighting wars like that. Again, in my opinion this shouldn't have been labeled a "Ghost Recon" game! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You do realise the original GR was set in the future dont you ?
Im not disagreeing with what your saying so dont think i am, As ive said elsewhere some things ive seen i like the look of others im not sure, I wil make my mind up for sure once i get to play it. But GR was always a game set in the future, thats not changed.
Brainlicker
05-19-2005, 09:56 AM
Atleast Ghost Recon and GRIT were believable. It was something people could grasp. All this extra stuff is eye candy, but when it comes down to it, it's just that, eye candy...where did all the grittiness of war go?
And yes, I understand it's a game...and you do realize that this version of "Ghost Recon" will alienate a lot of original fans, but I guess that doenst matter to them when they have a million little Rambos running around spending Mommy's and Daddy's money on disposable games.
XyZspineZyX
05-19-2005, 10:11 AM
Whether its believable or not depends on your view. A lot of people argued that the OICW should never have been in GR because it was only a prototype weapon at the time. While others felt it should be as it was more than reasonable to assume as a prototype it would be in use by the time the game was set.
How do we know whats been included in the game isnt already in use or at prototype stage ?
Will it alienate players?
Until i play the game or at least see more detailed info and videos of actual gameplay i cant offer a opinion on that
Brainlicker
05-19-2005, 10:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ms-kleaneasy:
Whether its believable or not depends on your view. A lot of people argued that the OICW should never have been in GR because it was only a prototype weapon at the time. While others felt it should be as it was more than reasonable to assume as a prototype it would be in use by the time the game was set.
How do we know whats been included in the game isnt already in use or at prototype stage ?
Will it alienate players?
Until i play the game or at least see more detailed info and videos of actual gameplay i cant offer a opinion on that </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, you seem to offer it alot on everything else, especially in defense of Restorm, so why stop there?
XyZspineZyX
05-19-2005, 10:25 AM
You see defense of RSE i see a fact about the game.
The game has always been based in the future, how realistic you perceive that to be depends on your thoughts on current prototypes and where future developments in warfare take us.
I can and will offer opinion in that area because it covers the games past and present which i have had first hand experience with. Im NOT going to voice a opinion on a game still in development that neither you or I have seen anything more than a few seconds of video footage on.
If you chose to see that as defending them carry on. But as i understand it im as equally entitled to my opinion as you are. And i voice that opinion when and only when i hold the full facts to base a opinion on http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
WhiteKnight77
05-19-2005, 10:39 AM
Brainlicker, remember now that I am a PC gamer and have not tried the XBox version of GR2 much less anything GR3 releated.
While I do not personally know him from more that he is also a staff member at GR.net, we do exchange PMs and will answer questions if possible in open forums and he does post very interesting pics in the Wikid Pics thread and SF info, he can't talk about what he sees at RSE, but GR.net has an insider, so to speak, at RSE. No, he is not employed by RSE, but is a consultant for them. I do know he is advising them on tactics use and will be the first to tell you that GR was not realistic. Then again we all knew that, but we loved the way the game played. He has also stated that SF teams are becoming more involved with direct action as well as still doing covert/stealth operations. I want to note that we at GR.net didn't seek to get someone on the inside, it just happened that way.
While gameplay may have speeded up some, he thinks the game will be something that is actually better than what it was even though it won awards. This will have to be seen mind you, and I want to see how it plays out too as do you and everyone else.
Now the original GR series was award winning, and while the PC gamers may be getting a version that is similar to what we had originally, I will agree that there are many who loved it that way on the consoles too. One reason why Ubi decided to give us PC gamers is what one may find in my New Coke vs. Old Coke anology. The Coca-Cola Company alienated their core consumer base and paid dearly by having their new product compared to 2 day old Pepsi. We old school PC gamers complained and moaned about GR moving away from it's award winning forumual. Hence, we didn't even get to taste a GR2 version while consolers did. If more of those who were unhappy with how it turned out voiced their opinions, it too, when done properly, could affect changes to what was not enjoyed and return it to something that was loved.
Remember, the online community is only a small part of a games actual size. Many do not even venture online to forums or fansites or newsgroups to find out more of a game. While we can't make them come online and voice their opinion, they do so with their wallets and that is why games get changed too, whether good or bad. GR2 for XBox at least, was shown by wallet, that it was an acceptable game to those who just want to jump right in and run around like a chicken with their head cut off blasting anything that moves.
Knowing how to complain properly is the key in my opinion.
Brainlicker
05-19-2005, 10:52 AM
OPINION....
Definition: [n] the reason for a court's judgment (as opposed to the decision itself)
[n] a vague idea in which some confidence is placed; "his impression of her was favorable"; "what are your feelings about the crisis?"; "it strengthened my belief in his sincerity"; "I had a feeling that she was lying"
[n] a personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or certainty; "my opinion differs from yours"; "what are your thoughts on Haiti?"
[n] a belief or sentiment shared by most people; the voice of the people; "he asked for a poll of public opinion"
[n] the legal document stating the reasons for a judicial decision; "opinions are usually written by a single judge"
[n] a message expressing a belief about something; "his opinions appeared frequently on the editorial page"
I don't actually believe an opinion has to be based on a fact....that's what makes it an "opinion", and the fact that no one really knows what this game will be like is just that. We can only speculate as to the end result.
And as far as it always taking place in the future, it was only so far into the future that it was still a tangible idea. So if we were to analyze the future of the Army and where the world is going politically what would we come up with (not that it matters, this is just a game anyway)?
Why don't we wait for a couple of "opinions" from others, maybe some with military backgrounds, people who fought in wars......as to how much validity there is here.
Besides, this has gotten way off point....OGR was an entirely different game than it is now, so the fact that it still carries the "Ghost Recon" title is a disappointment. The fact that they have, or will dumb down the console version for prepubes only makes it that much better. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif
WhiteKnight77
05-19-2005, 10:56 AM
Why don't you stop by GR.net and check out who I was referring to.
Brainlicker
05-19-2005, 11:01 AM
@WhiteKnight77....
I appreciate your post. You make mention to a Coke analogy and I agree, but to make the PC version deeper and the console version for the run and gun crowd seems...well, not right. It was both the xbox and PC crowd that bought and loved the game. Why not just make that an option on the console instead of cutting it out all together?
Well anyway, thanks for the info.
WhiteKnight77
05-19-2005, 11:51 AM
I don't see why they had to change from award winning gameplay for anyone truth be told and no, consolers shouldn't get shortchanged either.
Get those who agree with you to voice their opinions properly and see what you can affect.
w1ngSh0t
05-19-2005, 11:53 AM
If you have not done so yet check out the video here - http://www.ghostrecon.com/us/ghostrecon3/site.php
I downloaded it and played it back at a pretty large screen size just to make sure I was seeing things correctly - thermal imaging for snipers and walls that are penetrable ... the thermal imaging would be kind of cool, but finally having wood walls that don't stop bullets would be great.
Hopefully they are not showing a great scene that is not reflective of gameplay ...
Brainlicker
05-19-2005, 11:57 AM
Did you also notice smoke grenades?
w1ngSh0t
05-19-2005, 12:03 PM
If the smoke grenade is an indication that the enemy AI will not be able to see (and shoot) you laying prone through trees and bushes from 150 yds - than I am all for it.
If it is just a neat effect to throw into a trailer but not representative of the game - then don't waste my time.
WhiteKnight77
05-19-2005, 12:07 PM
Coke Classic (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=2791043913&m=8581055223&r=7001085223#7001085223)
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif
Ghost_Leader_1
05-19-2005, 12:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brainlicker:
...where did all the grittiness of war go?...
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Call of Duty, but ubfortunately, WWII is the new bandwagon and I for one have grown weary.
jchung
05-19-2005, 12:24 PM
Please don't let this be GR2 all over again. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
Please give the option of having tactical gameplay.
Brainlicker
05-19-2005, 12:36 PM
We just need a good tactical Civil War game! With stealth elements...how about it Redstorm? It could be futuristic and they could have spaceships!
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif
XyZspineZyX
05-19-2005, 01:16 PM
Brain my reference to Fact and opinion, was simply me saying GR had always been set in the future was a 'fact' whilst your believing I’m always defending ubi is your opinion. It would seem by your reply you misunderstood my post.
Now I’m personally tired of not being able to post an opinion on anything without the small minority accusing me of defending ubi, so I will post my point with a little more clarity and perhaps you will then understand it wasn’t about them us, you or me. Just my opinion and observations.
GR as WK has already pointed out was never as realistic as people claimed it to be. In addition people said they wanted even more realism, and while I completely agree some areas of GR2 are a dissapointment (and have said before on numerous occasions contrary to what you might like to believe) there are areas which imo improved on the realism, yet those same people who claimed to want more realism then complained about those changes.
A example of this is laying prone, in GR you could drop shot rapidly, while in GR2 its been brought inline with a realistic time scale it would take to lay down and aim, yet people complained they couldn’t drop as fast anymore.
So is it really a case of not so much wanting more realism but wanting another GR only better ?
In which case perhaps those voicing feedback prior to the development and release of GR2 didn’t make a great job of getting across what they wanted ?
If we are to blame for not making it completely clear what we wanted, then shouldn’t we go that extra mile this time around to make totally sure we are fully understood ? Shouldn’t we be as clear as we can be on what we expect from the game ?
My hope is that if we all manage to voice are opinions as clearly as possible then somewhere along the line we get a game we are all happy with. Everyone here has a valid opinion on GR, GR2 and GR3 but if we don’t make it clear what we mean we may well end up with a game that’s not what were after AGAIN
I personally would be more than happy to see GR3 release in the lines they have in mind but as they have done with Lockdown, 2 separate levels of game skill. Allowing those of us who liked the original to play that way, and those who prefer the faster paced play to also get what they like.
In fact GR actually had this but on a smaller scale, Arcade mode. I don’t know why they took it out while taking the game to a more fast paced level but they did. So perhaps they could simply re add that separate mode of play.
Apologies for the long post.
@ Brain we are all on the same side here http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
Brainlicker
05-19-2005, 01:32 PM
@Klean....Ok then, but do you think it will matter? It sounds like they know where the money is and they will go the extra mile to chase it. But who knows, like you said, it's still early enough. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
XyZspineZyX
05-19-2005, 01:37 PM
Yes i think it will matter, Yes they probably will get more money short term from the run gunners, But long run its us guys who are still playing the games several years down the line. And us who keep the long term money pumping in.
So that being the case perhaps pleasing both parties is the best solution all round. Whos knows. But its worth the try
jchung
05-19-2005, 01:58 PM
Klean, are you bullying people again?J/K http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Klean is one of the most diplomatic people on this forum. Fact, or is that an opinion? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
I personally don't mind the futuristic elements. I just want realism in terms of gameplay. UBI are you listening?
The only downside I can possibly see in the futuristic elements is that some or much of the equipment may never make it into service.
Consider the M8. The potential that the rifle may never see service is very great. A modified version may see service in the future, but in the current iteration it is almost certain that the rifle will not see service.
The M8 has some issues, and although it most likely will see service in come capacity or another, it is also very likely that it could be passed up as the standard issue weapon.
Also, if the US determines that the M468 will save enough in cost by not having to replace lower receivers, then the issue of using existing 5.56mm ammo may be overlooked. In which case the M8 may have to be modified even if it see service in a smaller capacity. There are many issues and factors that the brass still needs to look into before all of this is done, but the main point of this post is that not all of the elements presented in a game may ever see service. A down side to emulating future warfare.
striker_2k5
05-22-2005, 12:58 AM
Someone please tell me if OTS view is in GR3 because I like it alot.
asowle
05-22-2005, 08:06 AM
I hope they add co-op system link, i mean the power of xbox 360 can handle that, also nobody has said aboutmuch about 360 online play, old games handle 8x8, i wonder what the future will be, ghost recon 3, 25 a side..?
I do love the xm8, i play airsoft and brought the kit for mu g36, everybody handles it, loves it...
Hope they have the xm25 Gl, they should do, the army are testing it now
XyZspineZyX
05-22-2005, 08:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by asowle:
I hope they add co-op system link </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Isnt that already in there?
Im pretty sure ive played it and that all the system link options are the same as online play.
Brainlicker
05-23-2005, 12:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ms-kleaneasy:
Yes i think it will matter, Yes they probably will get more money short term from the run gunners, But long run its us guys who are still playing the games several years down the line. And us who keep the long term money pumping in.
So that being the case perhaps pleasing both parties is the best solution all round. Whos knows. But its worth the try </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wouldnt be great if they could make a game so it had an endless appeal for those who loved it? A game that could be run and set up however a host wanted to!
If they throw in map making tools and a ton of server settings and options the game would last a lot longer and remain a strong presence on LIVE. I think the problem is that they have become little pigs when it comes to profits and the target audience now. With shorter attention spans, it's easier for them to get bored and move on to the next game. Then in return Redstorm comes out with more run and gun games (not all of which are great) for them to buy and get bored with a month down the road. Nice cycle, but not for a lot of us.
Just give us a good solid game with a lot of customization. If you make a good game it might help boost your rep again, especially after GR2. You know, the little game you canceled for the PC and should have canceled for the xbox. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif
MakAttack
05-24-2005, 01:16 PM
Who thinks this game will be banned in Mexico?
buddhiraja
05-25-2005, 01:54 AM
Personally, I hate this futuristic sh**. There has been a lot of arguement that in 2013 it is realistic to have all these futuristic weapons, skins and equipments. I am thinking that GR was a very very successful game with current weapons, skins and equipments. Why does the game need to change with every sequel if the developers claim that the prequel has been so successful? Why not make the game and gameplay even more solid with every sequel rather than trying to remodel the game with every release ?
The game could have been taking place in 2006 as a flashback to the original GR. Then we could have had the current day equipments. I am afraid that with the introduction of the cross-com and other modern technology, the gameplay and nature of the game could change beyond repair.
If the series progresses this way, we could have GR5 taking place in 2100 and we would be shooting pulse guns. I hope this does not happen but I am feeling very uncomfortable with the intent of the developers.
It is very difficult for us, insignificant players, to stop the mighty developers from doing what they like but i hope, for old times sake, they give us the old fashioned options as an addition e.g - current day weapons, skins and equipments as an option, to use if we like it.
jchung
05-25-2005, 06:36 AM
@buddiraja
Agreed.
Another big problem with futuristic elements is that many of the elements never make it into service. Look at all of the things that have never made it into service over the last five decades. Anyone remember the XB70 Valkarie? The Soviet Union Produced the Foxbat and an entire missile system to combat this plane, and it never went into production.
I hope UBI is not going to end up like the Soviet Union where they produce all of these so called futuristic elements that never end up actually seeing service. GR would then end up being an unrealistic wish list that the US military never had fufilled.
crtChunk72
05-25-2005, 09:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buddhiraja:
If the series progresses this way, we could have GR5 taking place in 2100 and we would be shooting pulse guns. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
HALO is actually GR6, we just don't know it yet! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
I agree with your sentiment as well... a more current, realistic FPS would be ideal. With great amounts of realism, and a really smart AI system.
jchung
05-26-2005, 04:52 PM
So Chunk, are you telling me that I already have GR6? What is Halo2 then? GR7? Wow, I'm farther along in the series than I thought. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
buddhiraja
05-26-2005, 11:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crtChunk72:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buddhiraja:
If the series progresses this way, we could have GR5 taking place in 2100 and we would be shooting pulse guns. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
HALO is actually GR6, we just don't know it yet! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
I agree with your sentiment as well... a more current, realistic FPS would be ideal. With great amounts of realism, and a really smart AI system. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Then hopefully after GR5 we would start having GR(-1), GR(-2) in the reverse order, as GR6 ( Halo ) is already out. We would have our old game back. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
buddhiraja
05-26-2005, 11:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jchung:
@buddiraja
Agreed.
Another big problem with futuristic elements is that many of the elements never make it into service. Look at all of the things that have never made it into service over the last five decades. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's a good point. As far as I know, the OICW has been scrapped. But OGR has it as a realistic future weapon. Now it is not looking so authentic.
jchung
05-27-2005, 05:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buddhiraja:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crtChunk72:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buddhiraja:
If the series progresses this way, we could have GR5 taking place in 2100 and we would be shooting pulse guns. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
HALO is actually GR6, we just don't know it yet! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
I agree with your sentiment as well... a more current, realistic FPS would be ideal. With great amounts of realism, and a really smart AI system. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Then hopefully after GR5 we would start having GR(-1), GR(-2) in the reverse order, as GR6 ( Halo ) is already out. We would have our old game back. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Then what will GR(-10) be? Cavemen fighting with clubs? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Hey, Ug! flank the big guy and hit him over the head from behind!
WhiteKnight77
05-27-2005, 08:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buddhiraja:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jchung:
@buddiraja
Agreed.
Another big problem with futuristic elements is that many of the elements never make it into service. Look at all of the things that have never made it into service over the last five decades. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's a good point. As far as I know, the OICW has been scrapped. But OGR has it as a realistic future weapon. Now it is not looking so authentic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, the OICW has been scrapped and the military is looking at the XM8 (which is even being put on hold til other weapons manufactureres can submit weapons for testing too). The Marines have stated that they intend to stay with the M16A4
jchung
05-27-2005, 09:03 AM
Any more news on the M468? I can't imagine that the US would not switch to this gun. The list of benefits are just too long.
Uses the same M16 receivers (saves a ton of $$$)
Uses the same rail system (again saves a ton of $$$)
Uses all of the same accessories (saves $$$ again)
The rounds are so compact that you can fit 28 of them in the current 5.56mm 30 round mags
The gun has proven to not jam like the M4 (heavier bolt and buffer drives right through particles that would jam the M4)
The 6.8mm round delivers more than twice the hydrostatic shock that the 5.56mm round can
The 6.8mm round has the same trajectory that the 5.56mm round has
It is made here in the good ol US of A
I can't think of a single reason other than the fact that 5.56mm round have now been used forever, and that is not a good reason.