Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 47

Thread: David Sears removal a mistake. | Forums

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1

    David Sears removal a mistake.

    As a fan of the early Socom games that David Sears had a big part in I was very much looking forward to see what he could do for the R6 series and for the first time I was interested in this franchise and eagerly anticipating developments. David Sears was very meticulous in bringing authenticity to the environments in the classic Socom games by putting in extensive research into areas of operations used in the game. Every environment and ethnic group used in the game felt real and believable. Since his departure from Zipper Socom has never been the same and the environments feel bland and generic. The Socom games have also become progressively less tactical and offer a bland "going through the motions" run of the mill style of play since he left.

    I feel like David could have really contributed to making R6 a more tactical style of game and helped to create some of the best environments both on and offline that felt authentic. From what I have heard from some R6 fans this franchise has also been casualized a lot along the way and could have benefited from the knowledge and experience of Sears. Now I fear R6 Patriots is just going to play follow the leader with the industry and create just the latest COD knock off. I hope you guys are paying attention to the sales of the games trying to be like COD cause the franchises doing that saw some of their worst sales ever in the latest wave of shooters. (Socom 4, KZ 3. RFOM 3 just to name a few).

    Developers always say these days they need to make games more accessible for a broader audience but the problem is the market is severely over-saturated with that kind of game. Casual, accessible games on consoles don't have as much draw because casual app games can be bought much cheaper on mobile devices. There is a market of more traditional "hardcore" or "tactical" shooter fans who have been waiting a very long time for a shooter game of substance that has yet to be tapped as all the shooter devs chase the COD audience that is never coming. It would be nice to see one developer/publisher pick up on that and go for that market of tactical fans where there is literally no competition this generation of consoles instead of just giving us another run of the mill shooter that gets lost in the sea of all the other ones just like it. The departure of Sears from the project doesn't instill any confidence in me that you will be going the unique route and will just put up another COD clone. I knew of a lot of other classic Socom fans who have been starving for a real shooter for many years now that were interested with this project and that interest is all but dead after your recent announcement.

    Fans of games like Counterstrike and the classic iterations of Socom and R6 are looking for a shooter of substance. When will one dev step up and capitalize on that instead of following the same redundant failed strategy of copying what COD is doing. Copying COD is just making fans leave their once loved franchises and pushing them to go join the COD fanbase. It's become an "if you can't beat 'em join 'em" attitude from the fans who have watched their favorite franchises try to become COD instead of staying true to themselves.
    Last edited by TOMB4U; 03-09-2012 at 02:23 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by TOMB4U View Post
    It would be nice to see one developer/publisher pick up on that and go for that market of tactical fans where there is literally no competition this generation of consoles instead of just giving us another run of the mill shooter that gets lost in the sea of all the other ones just like it.
    There is one developer trying to get that game made. SIgn up and spread the word... http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...ctical-shooter
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  3. #3

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by MeanMF View Post
    There is one developer trying to get that game made. SIgn up and spread the word... http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...ctical-shooter
    Sorry buddy, but we have no guarantee of quality or quantity by feeding the horse before it pulls the buggy. Let us know if it turns out to be anything worth buying.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by hilbillyrok2007 View Post
    Sorry buddy, but we have no guarantee of quality or quantity by feeding the horse before it pulls the buggy. Let us know if it turns out to be anything worth buying.
    If it doesn't get funded, the project doesn't get made. This isn't something a big publisher is going to do. Worst case you're out $15. To me it's worth the minimal risk given that the guy running the project has a strong track record and knows R6/GR inside and out.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by hilbillyrok2007 View Post
    Sorry buddy, but we have no guarantee of quality or quantity by feeding the horse before it pulls the buggy. Let us know if it turns out to be anything worth buying.
    LOL!!!

    And by buying games from Ubisoft, you think you get quality and quantity?

    Just as an example, let's take another Tom Clancy title in development, namely, Ghost Recon Future Soldier.

    In your mind, is quantity equal to 4 hours of single player and 10 multiplayer maps?

    And about quality, I've just read a French magazine called ''PC Jeux'' where the authors of an article explain that the SP demo they played was bug-ridden, with floating textures, collision bugs, disappearing bodies, and poor framerates. That's basically the reason why Ubisoft is busy ''polishing'' the game, or like Adrian Lacey likes to say, ''making sure that your game experience is perfect (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAP4E3A1h1A#t=1m03s)''...

    Yeah Adrian, riiiiiiight...

    @ MeanMF

    Thanks for the info! At last, I've found a game worth investing my hard earned cash! It was about time...
    Last edited by imjustpassing; 03-11-2012 at 06:57 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. #6
    I'm not giving Ubisoft or anybody else before it gets produced. That's just stupid. Like P.T. Barnum said "There's a sucker born every minute". Go for it.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  7. #7
    This game sounded like it was going to be the best FPS ever made, the amount of realism and attention to detail plus AI, also coupled with new features and the gritty real to life narrative.

    When something isn't broken; but in fact sounds brilliant, it doesn't seem necessary to screw about with it.
    I'm not sure why Ubisoft made the personnel change, but I pray they won't ruin it.

    There's nothing I hate more than games being dumbed down and turned into COD clones simply for money, which I've seen many franchises get done to them. The Vegas games were what grabbed the wide audience so no need for that at all.

    They did say in a comment that after the staff reshuffle, the game has been largely unchanged, and Sear's vision is still being worked towards.
    Last edited by derangedxzombie; 01-28-2013 at 12:56 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #8
    Senior Member shobhit7777777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Posts
    6,852
    Quote Originally Posted by hilbillyrok2007 View Post
    Sorry buddy, but we have no guarantee of quality or quantity by feeding the horse before it pulls the buggy. Let us know if it turns out to be anything worth buying.
    I have to agree. All I have seen is a video full of promises...no preliminary Concept Art, no Pitch Document, no elaboration on premise or some core mechanics. Its just a lot of hand waving. I respect the developer and hope to god that he succeeds but if he wants my money he has to show me something more. So I know what I'm investing in.

    David Sears:

    He seemed like he had a great hold on the franchise. Under his direction we were seeing some super promising mechanics. Overhauled realistic animations, hardcore gunplay, micro-tactical planning, in-depth Squad ROE commands, smarter Squad AI..I mean you could order a guy to be taken out with a CQC attack, Rapelling 2.0 allowing for more infiltration points, breaching mechanics, a greater emphasis on stealth...I remember one of the devs saying that entire levels could be completed without getting into an exchange of gunfire, Planning mode in MP and squad work emphasis, a larger focus on serious and mature narrative substance.
    So yeah...Sears had a pretty good idea of the project.

    I am not at all happy at his exit. I just hope that they continue in the direction already set.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dcopymope View Post
    The more we discuss this game, the more I'm not buying into any of it. The target footage was made over a year ago as they said, which means the game was already well into development, well before 2011, otherwise they wouldn't have discussed the game in as much detail as they did the moment they announced it. So instead of actually showing us gameplay footage, they give us the sh!tty target footage, his "vision". For the most part, what you saw in the target footage is what we're going to get, and it was anything but tactical. The garage scenario itself didn't impress me all that much, for the most part, it didn't sound any more tactical than Vegas, just with new cheat gadgets. I still have a grain of hope for this game, but I'm expecting to be sorely disappointed come E3.
    The target footage was leaked. They weren't intending to release it for at least another couple of weeks. Also do you think that they would show you pre-alpha footage in 2010 when then game is to be released in 2012? That is not how game development works.

    R6 was still in paper design and prototype phase. All they would have had was whitebox models and placeholders testing the core mechanics. What they were talking about in the video was the on-paper design. What they WANTED to achieve.

    The render footage BTW was basically a powerpoint presentation on steroids for the Ubi execs. A short showcase of the "FEEL" of the game and how it might look and play. The execs won't give two flying ****s about the ability to breach a room from the ceiling or planning a multi-team attack. They want a quick look at the gameplay.

    As for tactical...under Sear's direction we were getting a deep micro-tactical planning commands. Which were like a hybrid of Vegas and Raven Shield Go-code commands. If you cared to read more about the game then you'd know that it was designed to give the player full tactical control of a situation and playstyle. You could use stealth to have your team quietly open the door and sneak in to a vantage point as you designated targets, you could have them pop smoke as they enter and then chain it with a movement command. In short you could really come up with complex plans on the fly.
    Now consider the Rappell 2.0 and the Breach mechanics...this is major clue that hints at sandbox encounters. So you have multiple tactical options.

    If you think that Patriots was going in the wrong direction...then I'd HATE to see your version of an R6 game and I pray you're disappointed at E3 2012
    Last edited by shobhit7777777; 03-25-2012 at 10:44 AM.

    I'm Batman



    Sig: Jazz117Volkov
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #9
    Senior Member sameer_monier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Cairo, Egypt
    Posts
    5,661
    Quote Originally Posted by shobhit7777777 View Post
    I have to agree. All I have seen is a video full of promises...no preliminary Concept Art, no Pitch Document, no elaboration on premise or some core mechanics. Its just a lot of hand waving. I respect the developer and hope to god that he succeeds but if he wants my money he has to show me something more. So I know what I'm investing in.

    David Sears:

    He seemed like he had a great hold on the franchise. Under his direction we were seeing some super promising mechanics. Overhauled realistic animations, hardcore gunplay, micro-tactical planning, in-depth Squad ROE commands, smarter Squad AI..I mean you could order a guy to be taken out with a CQC attack, Rapelling 2.0 allowing for more infiltration points, breaching mechanics, a greater emphasis on stealth...I remember one of the devs saying that entire levels could be completed without getting into an exchange of gunfire, Planning mode in MP and squad work emphasis, a larger focus on serious and mature narrative substance.
    So yeah...Sears had a pretty good idea of the project.

    I am not at all happy at his exit. I just hope that they continue in the direction already set.



    The target footage was leaked. They weren't intending to release it for at least another couple of weeks. Also do you think that they would show you pre-alpha footage in 2010 when then game is to be released in 2012? That is not how game development works.

    R6 was still in paper design and prototype phase. All they would have had was whitebox models and placeholders testing the core mechanics. What they were talking about in the video was the on-paper design. What they WANTED to achieve.

    The render footage BTW was basically a powerpoint presentation on steroids for the Ubi execs. A short showcase of the "FEEL" of the game and how it might look and play. The execs won't give two flying ****s about the ability to breach a room from the ceiling or planning a multi-team attack. They want a quick look at the gameplay.

    As for tactical...under Sear's direction we were getting a deep micro-tactical planning commands. Which were like a hybrid of Vegas and Raven Shield Go-code commands. If you cared to read more about the game then you'd know that it was designed to give the player full tactical control of a situation and playstyle. You could use stealth to have your team quietly open the door and sneak in to a vantage point as you designated targets, you could have them pop smoke as they enter and then chain it with a movement command. In short you could really come up with complex plans on the fly.
    Now consider the Rappell 2.0 and the Breach mechanics...this is major clue that hints at sandbox encounters. So you have multiple tactical options.

    If you think that Patriots was going in the wrong direction...then I'd HATE to see your version of an R6 game and I pray you're disappointed at E3 2012
    Totally Agree.

    Share your ideas with me on SC6 "if you love Conviction" Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
    Spin Offs Ideas
    Small Channel on Youtube
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by shobhit7777777 View Post
    The target footage was leaked. They weren't intending to release it for at least another couple of weeks.
    Or so they want you to believe.

    Quote Originally Posted by shobhit7777777 View Post
    Also do you think that they would show you pre-alpha footage in 2010 when then game is to be released in 2012? That is not how game development works.

    R6 was still in paper design and prototype phase. All they would have had was whitebox models and placeholders testing the core mechanics. What they were talking about in the video was the on-paper design. What they WANTED to achieve.

    The render footage BTW was basically a powerpoint presentation on steroids for the Ubi execs. A short showcase of the "FEEL" of the game and how it might look and play. The execs won't give two flying ****s about the ability to breach a room from the ceiling or planning a multi-team attack. They want a quick look at the gameplay.
    I never said I was expecting them to show anything in 2010. I said I was expecting them to show real gameplay footage in November of last year, the month they actually announced the game. The last R6 game was released four years ago, that's a lot of time to work on any game, and the only thing they can give us is target footage that they insultingly claim was going to be "leaked" the same month that they were planning on announcing the game anyway. It would take a huge leap of faith for me to believe it, as a lot of people didn't. As for your vain optimism for the game, I'll believe it when I see it. In fact, given that we're talking about Ubi Soft, I still may not believe it until close to the games release, given what they did with Ghost Recon Future Soldier and SC Conviction. So I wouldn't show too much optimism even if you do happen to be impressed with the E3 presentation.
    Last edited by Dcopymope; 03-25-2012 at 02:15 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •