Adopt the HUD Display and Helmet Cam from the XBOX Version and should also be fine, i'll missed that in the first 2 parts

The list of what I like to see in the next GR game.

1. Tone down the GFX, I mean you can still make a great game with ok GFX.
Not everyone have a super gaming rig and I think this might have lead to the mouse lag what a lot of people been talking about, I got a little lag but only in heat of fire. I’m running a 512 GFX card.

(Operating System: Windows XP with latest service pack installed DirectX 9.0c
CPU: 2.4 Ghz
RAM: 1 GB
Video Card: 128Mb DirectX compliant video card, Pixel shader 2.0 and above.
Hard Drive space: 1.8Gb of space is required to install the game
Internet connection: 128kbit Cable/DSL connection.
For a minimum system requirements. I’m a IT tech this is today’s pc minimum standards)

2. Get rid of the hero line and back to squad switching base like from the first GR games.
Maybe even have unlockable characters, but not online unlockable (don’t pull an EA games with the global points crap)

3. Keep the map set up I really like what you did on that where the map view is limited to the distance to the team. I really like the intel sky eyes too.

4. Bring back the direct IP connection. Come on its been around since the 90s and it a major part of online gaming. I know a lot of gaming companies are switching to this but at the same time you are seeing games disappearing from the servers for being to old. If the game is great it will never die it just go dedicated.

5. I can’t say much about the multiplayer part of the game cause when I seen the mouse lag and no direct ip I never gave it a try.

6. A some sort of a game lobby in multiplayer, because if everyone has to leave the server to switch maps is crazy.

7. Add or keep the eyes in the sky in multiplayer mode this could be fun.

8. listen to WhiteKnight77, he knows what he is talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by neilthecellist:

quote:

Originally posted by Lennart_970:
Well, first of all I would like to say I disagree with WhiteKnight. Advanced Warfighter was very cool. But I'm talking about 1 and not 2.

Anyway, The next GR should have to do something with Europe or maybe China. We've had the Russians (GR 1),Africans (Desert Storm), Cubans (Island Thunder), North Korean (GR 2) and Mexico (GR:AW 1&2).

I've seen Voice Control is possible so let's throw it in too.
Make sure it's not able to mod. Instead, make sure the people don't need to. Let them be able to create there own clothing and armor style like in Rainbow Six. Make enough multiplayer variants and make sure there is a large number of weapons to choose from.

Get a grip on the AI. AI in GRAW 1 was pretty good. Mix it up with the cover system from Rainbow and you've got a good battle.

Battlefields:
Don't let us fight in Urban only. I like sneaking in the forrest with a Ghillie suit. (also something they should put in the next GR, GHUILIE SUITES GUYS!! DON'T FORGET!). Make it possible to have a large battle at some moments. Not just 6 guys running around in total but like 30 and let tanks crush trough bushes and rivers. Gives the feeling of a battlefield.

Do NOT make it a 3rd person shooter! The origional GR was supposed to make it feel YOU were the soldier. 3rd person gives me the feeling like I'm in control of a wannabe-hi tech-rambo.

Crosscom and Narcom were nice
But some briefing BEFORE heading out to the battlefield would be better. Narcom for quick updates only.

Keep the amazing graphigs from GRAW1! I want to be able to count the bricks in a wall. (not that I'm actualy going to) But make the grass textures better and make sure that IF there's going to be a ghillie suit in the game, it matches the grass. I hate it when I can detect player profiles from a distance (CoD4!!, BF2!!).

COVERING SYSTEM! VERY IMPORTANT!
leaning around corners doesn't really work... it's nice and a good solution but I miss the idea of GOOD cover.

Weapons effects and recoil were nice. Grenade explosions were awesome (all in GRAW 1!)
Keep at it

That's how I would like the next GR to be.

You're talking out of context. WhiteKnight was talking about GRAW 1 for PC. Both GRAW games were completely different on the PC version than the console counterparts. Even the storyline was completely different. Levels were different, and there was NO COVERING SYSTEM. (Leaning only)

Out of context? I was talking about GRAW 1 PC version too. So what are you talking about? Storyline was kind of the same and I know there was just the peeking around corners. I mensioned that myself so... wtf??

I've been playing Ghost Recon for a long time and most version aswell. So I know what I like to see improved on the next version.

I have read some of the posts in this thread and I have come to this conclusion. Quite a few people were not impressed with the latest Ghost Recon titles for various reasons.
These include, too much demand on graphics, little red diamonds (see the ghostrecon.net forums), and the game not staying true to its roots.
But let me ask you something, were wars fought the same in the 1800's as they were in the 1900's?
What about WW1 and WW2?
Vietnam and the Gulf War?
The obvious answer is no.
The general premise of war may be the same, but the tactics, strategy and weapons all have changed.
So has Ghost Recon, for the better.
Ghost Recon's evolution is meant to mimic the technological advances in warfare, a la the "Advanced Warfighter" title.

Enough of that, lets get down to what I came here for;

I was tremendously impressed with the 2 most recent Tom Clancy titles I purchased, HAWX (PC) and End War (Xbox 360), I loved the way their storylines coincided with each other, and most importanly, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter.

My suggestions for future titles of Ghost Recon would be;
Develop a strong story, one that ties in with End War and HAWX, this helps to immerse the player in the game world. Even tieing in Rainbow Six and Splinter Cell may not be a bad thing.
Keep up the demand on computer hardware. I still prefer GR:AW 2 to Crysis in terms of physics. And the ultra-detailed and realistic visuals in GR:AW 2 are things that should only be improved upon, not dumbed down for gamers with outdated hardware.
More pop, less stop. Don't leave everything to the AI. Scripted events help to keep the gameplay exciting, and helps avoid slow downs during missions (however, you don't have to go over the top in the way the Call Of Duty series does at times).
Stay with the "near-futuristic" setting. There's no need for more games where the M4 or M16 are the main weapons. Instead stay with and expand on the SCAR models. This also accounts for enemies, for example, a battle with the European Enforcer Corps (End War), or Artemis Global Security (HAWX) would see them using their respective weapons, uniforms and vehicles.

Other ideas have already been mentioned;
Voice control. Barking out orders to friendly AI instead of having to either enter satelite view, or stick your neck out into harm's way is helpful.
Change the setting. Yeah, we know Mexico is full of border jumpers, but lets leave that to the National Guard.
Larger scale of firefights, more open areas, this helps to bring back Ghost Recon closer to it's roots, just look at the upcoming game Operation Flashpoint 2 Dragon Rising.
Improved multiplayer functionality and user friendly-ness (what?). Yes, no one likes getting kicked from a game because the server admin decides to change maps. Or not being able to play campaign with friends using the same mods.
That said, keep up the mod tools, I was, and still am, an avid user of IGOR, the editor for Ghost Recon.

However, there are some suggestions I do not agree with;

Don't get rid of Scott Mitchell, Marcus Brown, Joe Ramirez, John Hume or any of the other Ghosts, I've personally grown attached to this specific team. But if the storyline calls for it, atleast have them involved somehow (ex. In End War, Mitchell is the General of the JSF, and Brown is a Colonel).
Like I said before, don't dumb down the demand on hardware.
Don't listen to Whiteknight77, or anyone else that tells you you're last games where **** just because they were different.

Thank you for your time.

P.S. Everyone else, flame all you want, you know I'm right.

Do you think we could get a better range on the sniper rifle?
In Graw 1 the range is like 150 meters which is pretty lame for a big *** gun like the M99

quote:

Don't listen to Whiteknight77, or anyone else that tells you you're last games where **** just because they were different.

The only thing wrong with the last 2 games is that the netcode=fail.

It's a great single player game.

quote:

Taharoakehua

Do you think we could get a better range on the sniper rifle?
In Graw 1 the range is like 150 meters which is pretty lame for a big *** gun like the M99

You can set the rifles to any distance you want, also increase the draw distance to what ever you want, but will be heavy on lower end PC`s to play. 150M was a pretty poor setting to have from scratch though. No wonder we lost the bino`s, not much point eh?

quote:

Originally posted by baff6:

quote:

Don't listen to Whiteknight77, or anyone else that tells you you're last games where **** just because they were different.

The only thing wrong with the last 2 games is that the netcode=fail.

It's a great single player game.

Ahmen to that. Grown pretty fond of playing a few of my own missions solo, but when other`s join, it just all goes downhill, non responsive enemy and vehicles to random crashes.

quote:

Freaks-v2.0

8. listen to WhiteKnight77, he knows what he is talking about.

Couldn`t agree more.

Ghost Recon for the campers. Then there is Ghost Rogue. The version for the run and gunners. or

http://www.ghostrecon.net/foru....php?showtopic=52494

Ghillie Suit

XBOX LIVE RANKED: It would be nice to have an eject from server and a ban from server option for hosting. Several player's now spend the entire night jumping in and out of ranked rooms over and over and over TEAM KILLING.

A banned from server would fix this problem and keep the game enjoyable for all.

This would be great for GHOST RECON 4 and as an update to GRAW 2.

What do you think? Please reply...

Why is this thread stickied but the thread under the same topic with 12 times the number of posts not. Could they not be merged at least.

quote:

Originally posted by PALADIN_BS:
Why is this thread stickied but the thread under the same topic with 12 times the number of posts not. Could they not be merged at least.

It's another conspiracy, they want to push that one all the way to the bottom.

I know people are split on the first person versus over the shoulder, but I love the over shoulder view. One thing I would like to see is more of my character head to heal, no third person games do this anymore. One way to solve the issue of being able to see around corners in the third person view to to make the person expose more of themselves when at the corner, if the person doesn't use the cover feature/ peek feature (that I hope you guys implement!). Just can't wait to get some screens or vids of the game, everything else is boring me right now!

We needd Ubisoft to settel this right now and tell us whether the next GR will be a 1st or 3rd person game.

My opinion is all based on the console version but I'm tired of repeating myself concerning 3rd vs 1st person and i can safely say that may not buy the next GR if it is a FPS. The gaming market if flooded with FPS's and their all the same. If that's what you want then go play CoD, operation flash point or one of the hundreds of FPS's out there!

I don't feel first person only games are realistic because it doesn't allow the player to do what they could do in real life and your field of vision is not what is like in real life.

What Ubi need to do is show everyone why third person is better than first for tactical games by including game play that you can only do right in third person. Things like:

> Abseiling
> Stealth
> Hand-to-hand
> Cover system
> Jumping and climbing

Now I'm not saying 3rd person doesn't have its problems, like looking around corners without exposing your self or not being able to aim and quickly and precisely, so here is what i suggest.

Make a hybrid shooter where the game is in 3rd normally but when you press the left trigger, instead of going into the OTS view, your put in a fps view. Similar to how the lefts trigger works in COD4. That may improve aiming and responsiveness. Note: you should also halve the option so leave it like it was in GRAW with a zoomed in OTS view.

For the looking around corners, the developers could add some sort of camera override near the corners of buildings that prevents it. They could also design a new cover system to accompany this new feature.

You should be able to take cover both facing and having your back to the wall. When you get to the corner of a wall, you get the option to take cover and then use your analogue stick to peek around. You should only have to stick half your head out so see around the corner. The initial view around the corner could be blurry and come into more focus the longer you stay exposed or when you stick your whole head out to look with both eyes. Blind fire should also be an option whilst in cover.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: xBLACK_JACKx,

quote:

Originally posted by xBLACK_JACKx:
I'm sick of this! The gaming market if flooded with FPS's and their all the same. If that's what you want then go play CoD, operation flash point or one of the hundreds of FPS's out there!

What Ubi need to do is show everyone why third person is better than first for tactical games by including game play that you can only do right in third person.

Ubi will never be able to do this. And when a particular game is released, you will see why that Tac-Sims should be 1st person only and not some arcade 3rd person shooter.

You must have replied while i was editing my post WhiteKnight77. In light of my new post, care to explain why 1st person is more realistic?

How many times does someone have to bring up the same old, same old, dribble?

quote:

We needd Ubisoft to settel this dribble right now.

We?

quote:

My opinion is...

We all have opinions, but your post is more of what you think is and is not..

quote:

The gaming market if flooded with FPS's and their all the same. If that's what you want then go play CoD, operation flash point or one of the hundreds of FPS's out there!

Well excuse me, I`ll play what I like happily whenever I please thnx. Will not prevent me from wanting a new GR.

quote:

I don't feel first person

I being you. I do feel feel it is far more realistic than any other 3rd person game ever played here.

quote:

You should only have to stick half your head out so see around the corner. The initial view around the corner could be blurry and come into more focus the longer you stay exposed

Thats a realistic suggestion.

Tinker, I can't believe you took the time to post that rubbish. That was a completely pointless post and you’re obviously arguing for arguments sake.

Perhaps you are retarded...

Thank you Sir.

About jumping.

Would GR ever see it in place? I thought about the simple option of being unable to fire your weapon until the jump animation was completed. You cannot fire until you have landed. Keep the fuzzy bunny freaks out of our servers etc..

quote:

Originally posted by xBLACK_JACKx:
You must have replied while i was editing my post WhiteKnight77. In light of my new post, care to explain why 1st person is more realistic?

Simple, walk up to a wall and see if you can see around it.