Senior Member
Still too slow especially when compared to AI.
One of the best tests I ran was the utilization of an air and ground vehicle, stir up some enemy AI, and fly/drive away parallel to their fire. I then had teammates fire while I drove away parallel to it.
Significant difference that should be evened out; Looking at the p416 particularly
Senior Member
Member
Banned
Senior Member
Take that back GMT. .....seriously. You wouldn't want the PvP team to make the next GMT. Trust me.Originally Posted by GiveMeTactical Go to original post
Banned
Truth be told, I wish UBI would sell the IP to a Company that wants to make a real tactical shooter but following this quote from crowlecjOriginally Posted by Kean_1 Go to original post
He's making it seem like the pvp team got rid of it in ghost war, hence, my comment because they got it right, made the effort, took the extra day to finish, didn't forget they were making a shooter and not a documental... take your pic here!Originally Posted by crowlecj Go to original post
Anybody but Paris would do fine. Don't get me wrong, they did make a beautiful world, albeit, barren but beautiful nonetheless so there is that but their vision and execution of a tactical shooter is lackluster to say the least... even if on consoles is the closest you guys have gone to. I am not arguing the fun or even habit forming sense of the game but to NOT go the extra mile just so they can make the extra million is just cheesy in the grand scheme of things... I mean, they are claiming record sales and the MTs have sold very well, people want to kill them but that's the nature of the beast so it is not like they can't spare a moment to finish what they started... that's all I was saying!
Senior Member
Well. The the single biggest issue deterring people from investing in the game is the ballistics. It doesn't matter if people are wrong or right. -- The fact that everything is "faster than a (hardly) speeding bullet", isn't viewed as a challenging factor. It's comedy.
I mean, you as the player. A Ghost opetator, etc, etc.. can't dodge bullets. You have to face near instantaneous, and unerring shots (especially in the latter half of Tiers). Even their vehicles come in at supersonic speeds, like missile's; to then deploy occupants like scatter grenades.
People can only harp on about this for so long, until it's "so long".. Those of us invested just accept it's there. Most people just see it as a immersion breaking, comical and unfair imposition. That is anything but intuitive.
People don't feel like anything they do has an impact on the game world, as they advance. Not, especially, their shots from their guns. When talking about "velocity"; it's not about what happens when a projectile runs out of puff. It's about what the projectile does the moment it leaves the barrel. As it stands it's way too slow to be called a "shot".
So it doesn't matter which game mode devs do what. Tier mode, especially 20-1, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the player is deliberately placed at an extreme disadvantage. Ask yourself, does it feel like enemy shots are slow? Slow enough to be dodged? -- Or does it more, feel like you are facing a hail of dangerous and deadly gunfire?
Which is the bottom line for most gamers in games like these. They don't feel dangerous and deadly. They're going to lose interest very quickly.
2500'/s vs 286'/s isn't cool. That's why when AI BLUEFOX was harping in about subsonic rounds, I was contending as a ridiculous and unnecessary assertion, in the other thread about ADV Suppressor. Our projectiles do not even travel at that speed (1200'/s).
Senior Member
ahhh..... I missed that.Originally Posted by GiveMeTactical Go to original postTruth be told, I wish UBI would sell the IP to a Company that wants to make a real tactical shooter but following this quote from crowlecj
He's making it seem like the pvp team got rid of it in ghost war, hence, my comment because they got it right, made the effort, took the extra day to finish, didn't forget they were making a shooter and not a documental... take your pic here!
Anybody but Paris would do fine. Don't get me wrong, they did make a beautiful world, albeit, barren but beautiful nonetheless so there is that but their vision and execution of a tactical shooter is lackluster to say the least... even if on consoles is the closest you guys have gone to. I am not arguing the fun or even habit forming sense of the game but to NOT go the extra mile just so they can make the extra million is just cheesy in the grand scheme of things... I mean, they are claiming record sales and the MTs have sold very well, people want to kill them but that's the nature of the beast so it is not like they can't spare a moment to finish what they started... that's all I was saying!
Yeah, on that level I can understand but as far as a general statement, I wouldn't want the next GRW to be anything like GW. I know you don't like PvP or even co-op for that matter but if you had played GW before (and knowing your preferences), I think you'd agree.
Senior Member
If you're having trouble with the game as it is; then the LAST thing, ANYONE should be asking for is "realism". -- Once you go down that rabbit hole, it's a never ending descent into limitations and increasing difficulty that can't be avoided. THAT'S!! why nobody does it.
Why is it every time there is a conversation about something as simple and straightforward as ballistic velocity (in THIS game!). Someone has to obfuscate the discussion with "realism" as if that's going to actually "FIX" anything? -- It won't.
Do a breakdown (mentally, or on paper) of what constitutes simulating 'reality' and you'll quickly see how it doesn't work as a 'game'. Not even in art style used. -- You can only "draws upon" inspiration from reality. To mimic it, is mimicry; and in a game, is gimmickry.
Senior Member
The more I play the game, the more annoyed I get with the artificially lowered muzzle velocity. It's not fun to have to significantly lead a shuffling SBC goon at a range of 20-30 meters. With suppressors it becomes comically low.
I sincerely hope they rectify it.
@Paladin
Because Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon is a brand that is associated with authentic weapons, aesthetics and realistic gameplay.Why is it every time there is a conversation about something as simple and straightforward as ballistic velocity (in THIS game!). Someone has to obfuscate the discussion with "realism" as if that's going to actually "FIX" anything? -- It won't.
Bear in mind, when people talk about 'realism' they aren't asking for a combat simulator. It's never all or nothing, and the slippery slope argument that you've used is a fallacy in itself.
"Realism" can fix a lot because game design has a lot to do with balancing. Real life, believe it or not, tends to balance itself out real nice. If you try to force it artificially in an experience like Ghost Recon, you run the risk of upsetting the natural order of things and people notice this.
Let me paint a picture of how this works:
Player has access to a giant arsenal. If player carries this giant arsenal on him/her at all times, he/she becomes 'overpowered'. Tank? NP...going to dig into the magical arsenal and whip out the Gustav. Enemy infantry? NP...quickly stow the Gustav and whip out the LMG. Enemy marksmen on the ridge? Well...no worries...I have my .50 cal right here on my back.
The game loses challenge. The game loses depth. The player doesn't have to make meaningful choices anymore. This leads to the designers having to artificially induce difficulty in order to ensure the player remains engaged and interested....rather than bored.
In a game like GR part of the fun is to draw on real world experiences and make tactical decisions. This goes out the window when a realistic tac-shooter doesn't adhere to the basic principles of realism and authenticity.
I'd suggest you do this exercise yourself. You'll note that there is a fine line between real life and game...and the game can stand to borrow elements from the former to increase tactical depth and challenge. There is a way to do it, and games have been doing it successfully for years.Do a breakdown (mentally, or on paper) of what constitutes simulating 'reality' and you'll quickly see how it doesn't work as a 'game'. Not even in art style used. -- You can only "draws upon" inspiration from reality. To mimic it, is mimicry; and in a game, is gimmickry.
