Upcoming tactical shooter from Blackfoot Studios: Ground Branch

[sparks50 0]

rockpapershotgun Ghost of recon Past"

[kernriver 4]

Good article.

I think BFS should emphasize more the fact that several (at least two) co-op modes will be in the first release, since I get the feeling, reading comments on the RPS article, that is what lot of people want.

[Flogger23m 2]

New video show casing some of the sounds in game. Entire sound library will be released for modders to use. :)

[zoog 18]

Love it! Great attention to detail. I knew from some remarks of John that they were trying to get all details, but this surpassed my expectations actually.

[paecmaker 23]

I love this kind of game, however looking at the money they need and how much people have given so far it doesnt look that good(its still 15 days left but the havent even passed 100 000 yet.

[onlyrazor 11]

I love this kind of game, however looking at the money they need and how much people have given so far it doesnt look that good(its still 15 days left but the havent even passed 100 000 yet.

Don't worry. With the summer break approaching, there's gonna be lots of lonely students forking over the cash.

[sic-disaster 311]

I wish more people would jump onboard with this project, I really do.

For years I've heard people grumbling about how gaming isn't as good as it used to be, and how tactical shooters have all died off and had their soul replaced by big money-grabbing corporations. But now, now there is a chance to return to that golden age of the genre.

This game so very clearly wants to do exactly that, with a no nonsense approach and without giving in to mainstream demands that has diluded our game experiences for so long now. In all honesty, if people don't jump at the opportunity to support a game and a developer like this, to me they will lose all rights to complain. You have become part of the problem. It is up to us to fight for the revival of the genre. A genre that has died a long time ago. And come on, we all love zombies right? So let's bring this genre back from the grave with a vengeance!

Now I also hear a lot of people saying "It's not interesting to me because ArmA does everything that GB does and more".

Don't get me wrong. I LOVE ArmA, I've been playing BIS's games since the release of OFP:CWC and haven't skipped on a single release or DLC, and I've sunk hundreds if not thousands of hours into OFP and ArmA both.

But it does NOT fill the hole left behind by Ghost Recon or Rainbow Six, at all. There is something about those games that was special. They were (imo) every bit as hardcore an experience as ArmA, but without any of the down-time that can often occur in ArmA. They were games that you could boot up and play straight away, without being about constant action or high body counts.

The mod support of Ghost Recon IMO was even far superior to that of ArmA, because of the way it was implemented: you were simply able to enable and disable them at your leisure from within the options menu, without having to quit and restart the game or any of that other hassle that often comes with ArmA.

But more importantly, they nailed a form of combat that ArmA completely lacks. The CQB environment. Clearing houses and rooms felt a million times better and more natural than they do in ArmA. Sure you can do it in ArmA, but it doesn't even get remotely close to the actions you could perform in Swat 4 or Raven Shield, or the older R6 games. GR was a bit more difficult in that regard but it still felt a lot more responsive than it does in the ArmA series.

In the end though, to me R6 and GR were the perfect combination of realism, hardcore difficulty and fun, combined with a form of tactics that I love the most. OFP/ArmA shine in the large open area combat, R6/GR shined in the urban and CQB environments. ArmA does not replace them.

I urge everyone here to make a pledge, even if it's just 15$. Every bit helps, and the more people back it, the more others will start to believe in the project and pledge also.

Rarely have I seen a developer this dedicated to the genre, apart from BIS. These guys want to go all the way and as far as they have to go to make the game as they had originally envisioned it: a game with a fully working single player campaign and co-op with smart, responsive and dynamic AI, and a fully working MP experience. But it all has to start with the MP version. If we can't find the money to make that, you can kiss an SP/Co-op experience goodbye as well.

And I'm one of those guys that never played PVP in R6, GR or ArmA. For that I always resorted to Red Orchestra, which imo did it best of all. That was my go-to game for a multiplayer adverserial experience. But from what I've read about the way BFS is going to handle MP, I have no doubt that I will fully enjoy the experience they are going to offer. Largeish maps with random insertion points, random objectives, and possibly even randomly blocked-off routes, ensuring that every map can deliver a ton of different experiences sound extremely great. That way people can play a map for a long period of time and still not know what to expect, keeping teamwork essential for winning. In every other game people figure out a map in about 3 playthroughs and teamwork falls away. Everybody kind of knows what to do and goes off to do their own thing. With GB that doesnt sound nearly as big a possibility. Teamwork and tactics will prevail, as the defending team gets a while to set up a defense/ambush as the attacking team is flown in to a random point, from where they have to make their way to a randomly placed objective, not fully knowing from what direction to expect the defenders. How awesome is that? What MP game has offered a similar experience without providing maps so huge you can spend half an hour without encountering a single person?

This game is too promising to fail. Let's not allow that to happen, for the love of god.

[-GR-Operative 10]

Disaster, I'm with you on this one. The ArmA2 community could show a bit of love to GB.

[Bozkro 1]

A.M.A.Z.I.N.G.

Definitely, Will buy.

[zoog 18]

Absolutely agree with you SiC. Arma never filled the gap that was left by R6 and Ghost Recon. Arma 3 won't fill that gap either.

The ArmA2 community could show a bit of love to GB.

So true. We are all tactical gamers. Help each other out when there is a developer who wants to do things right for us. How many people buy DLC's for Arma 2, not because they want the DLC content, but because they want to support BIS. Sure, BFS still has to make their game, but they have the right mindset and attitude, and also interact with their community without any bullshit PR and also respect modding as the life blood of PC gaming. It doesn't happen very ofter to have this type of developer in the tactical shooter genre!! Even if it's not 100% your game, there are still reasons enough to pledge at least $15 to show your support IMHO.

BTW:

Jonathan Conley (producer) and John Sonedecker (founder of BFS) are going to be doing a AskMeAnything on reddit Sunday 06/24/2012 at 4pm EST.

Edited June 23, 2012 by zoog

[BOTA:16 0]

Very good points SiC, couldn't agree more. Sadly time is running out. Bothers me quite a bit when someone nitpicks at the KS campaign itself with some superiority complex as reason(s) not to pledge, instead of looking at the idea and what the end product is trying to be to make their decision. If they like the idea and what the game can become they should contribute. If not then they shouldn't. But a game like GB or anything remotely close to will not ever get made without the fans of these types of games stepping up.

[MBot 0]

Well spoken Disaster!

[Defunkt 431]

Bothers me quite a bit when someone nitpicks at the KS campaign itself with some superiority complex as reason(s) not to pledge, instead of looking at the idea and what the end product is trying to be to make their decision. If they like the idea and what the game can become they should contribute.

If you're referring to my 'nitpicking' (and I'm pretty sure you are); ideas are all well and good but where money's concerned you absolutely must have faith that it's going to be used wisely because Kickstarter offers no guarantees, that's where it falls down for me - I don't see that these guys are necessarily deserving of the best part of a half million dollars capital to chance without any accountability or personal risk (given they'll be paying themselves a wage all the while). If they did realise their entire feature list I'd certainly buy the game even though I dislike the Unreal engine (another reason I'm not keen on the project and now slightly dark on Takedown). However I see no grounds at all for your blind faith that they will (in fact I think the small but obviously zealous following around this project are a trifle soft in the head), after five years and 'countless thousands of dollars from their life savings' there's hardly anything to show, certainly compared to what volunteer mod teams are routinely able to achieve for free in their spare time. Again, sorry if you don't like my take on things or see me as having a 'superiority complex' (wut?), but you're going to encounter divergent viewpoints on an Internet discussion forum, some of them might actually be based on sound reasoning.

[sic-disaster 311]

While I have little interest in becoming involved with a discussion that I might seemingly not win regardless of reasoning, I feel I must step in here. Because seriously, somehow GB fans are 'soft in the head'? Really? That is so terribly elitist, you know that right? I don't see that much sound reasoning from your part.

As for not having much to show, I whileheartedly disagree there. If anything, GB has more to show right now than any game on Kickstarter so far, who all come with ideas and artwork and not much else. You have working gameplay mechanics and prototypes and the bare basics of a whole lot of the features are in there in rudimentary shape. And for some reason those games that offer only ideas and promises seem to be met with more enthusiasm than Ground Branch, which is very, very disappointing to say the least.

Your argument is that somehow mod teams are able to do better. Let me ask you this, how many mods start up and quit after a certain period of time? They drop by the hundreds. If they do make it, usually their quality isn't all that high with exception of a select few. This isn't a mod project, this is being worked into a AAA title standards. That takes money, and that is why the Kickstarter is there.

What else you should keep in mind is that most mod teams progress usually takes as long as it takes for hell to freeze over. It is because they work in their spare time, and that is what BFS has been doing for a long time now, and that is why it is taking a long time too. What's more, BFS members have families to maintain. They can't decide to go live off of ramen for half a year like a college mod team. So they need the money to be able to work on the title full time, as spare time work will take forever to develop a game up to the quality they want to achieve. Obviously you don't like that idea for some reason, but in reality you are doing the same thing when you have your car serviced. People get paid so they can maintain a family, they won't work on your car in their spare time either. If you want the game, you have to pay for it one way or another. The difference with KS is that you pay upfront so yes, there is room for doubt and hesitation.

But keep in mind this: BFS has tried every possible way to get funding for the game. Publishers simply are not interested. They have been trying for a long, long time. During that entire time, they have not once given in to any of a publishers demand, rather choosing to keep going on their own. You may doubt it but they have unquestionably poured their own personal money into the project. Many licenses including UE3 have been bought with that money, and what they couldnt manage themselves they have hired out to other people. All of that has taken money. They have managed to keep afloat and going for years now, and now they are running out. Things simply cannot continue going on the way it has been going. Does it require trust? Definitely. Have BFS earned that trust? In my opinion they have, based on their conviction and unwaivering loyalty to the concept of Ground Branch. Never have they made a promise that they have not kept.

To me there is no doubt that they will finish the game if given the proper funding, and they will finish it their way. Does that make me soft in the head? Apparently so. But know that this is the case for many of BFS' community that have followed the game since it's announcement. We are not blind fanboys, but rather have learned from experience the fact we can trust BFS. I guess you have had to be there. And I guess you are simply a skeptic of KS alltogether too, so there is not much else left to say. Either trust or don't. I do.

[Defunkt 431]

Never have they made a promise that they have not kept.

It's pretty easy to avoid breaking promises if you never make any.

But know that this is the case for many of BFS' community that have followed the game since it's announcement. We are not blind fanboys, but rather have learned from experience the fact we can trust BFS. I guess you have had to be there.

This is kind of what I mean. I think I first became aware of Ground Branch in 2009 after following a link in galzohar's signature here. Even then (2yrs post-announce) it appeared to be a textbook example of vapourware, no screenshots and nothing at all to see and you zealots have been there another three years since still with no signs of progress all the while. Are you seriously telling me you never felt like you were having your chain yanked, even just a little? I'd be really concerned if you hadn't, it'd make you look even more like creepy cult followers than you do now. Where money's concerned you should use your head, not your heart.

[sic-disaster 311]

Could you please stop acting so condescending, it makes it hard to maintain a friendly conversation. 'We' are not zealots.

As a matter of fact even I had a period of time where I stopped frequenting the GB forums because of the lack of news, and only recently came back. Before the recent events I only checked in there once every half a year or so. As far as I know the people that did stick around were those who donated some money at the start of GB and became donators. They had access to a special donators forum which showed them some stuff every now and then, things not available to the general public. I didnt have any money or a means to donate back then and so I never got access to it because BFS stopped taking donations after a while. But for them there was an actual incentive to stick around, and not a blind fanboy cult that clung to empty promises.

As to myself, the recent footage impressed the hell out of me even in it's alpha stages, because I can literally feel the design is in the same spirit as it was for the original Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon. It feels like the natural evolution I always wanted out of a sequel. It's like an unofficial Rogue Spear-like sequel: the design is unaltered, and the mechanics move forward. Watching the ingame footage I can envision what the game will ultimately play like, and that vision more than warrants the small price tag of 15$.

I pledged 140 so that might make me seem like some kind of nerd fanboy again but I honestly don't give a shit.

Whereas money is concerned, for projects like these I happily follow my heart. Money in the end is meaningless and I don't care for it much. For you that might be different, by the sound of it you'd make a better Dutchman than me.

Kickstarter is all about heart, it's always a chance no matter the project. Either you get behind that mindset or you don't, in which case you may resign from the KS project in it's entirety.

[zoog 18]

Sure, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But I just think it's sad that a developer like BFS, with such a passion for the genre and community, is just kicked down by so many people (seeing that the backer numbers are still around 1300). :( The last years they gave everything for this genre, poured their heart, soul, free time and personal money into this, only to be slapped in the face by the general tac shooter community. The logic of this is beyond me. Like we have so many developers to pick from :confused:

Unfortunately, our financial realities won out over sheer will and heart to move the game along. This has been a very tough road to go down and ultimately led us to the conclusion that it was a vicious cycle of stop/start development that we simply could no longer sustain but no matter what we would not let the project die.

Using our own savings and income we've managed to build a solid pre-alpha build as a proof of concept with the foundation for most of the systems that make the game unique in place. Now is the time that we need proper financial resources to complete this project.

One philosophy of BlackFoot Studios is that when looking for people to give you funding support, you yourself must have obligated a significant investment as well. John has put in his personal savings and, with others, countless hours of hard work. We are dedicated to completing this project on greatly reduced salaries; any financial rewards will come from the sales of the game.

On a side note, while Ground Branch was becoming as some people claim "vaporware", they simply worked on different projects as contracters on games like Red Orchestra 2 and US Government projects to generate some income. Maybe BFS should have been open at the times when there was no work done at all. Sometimes as long as a year passed by while they couldn't work on Ground Branch at all (IIRC from the previous longer version of the KS project page). That's just putting your project on the shelf because of financial realities. That has IMO nothing to do with incompetence or being a "vaporware" developer.

So there has been this long time with almost no money (slow or no development) and now when there is the moment to actually get proper financial backing (fast serious development) people hold their history of not having enough money against them, expecting that when they actually have money to properly do something they will still be slow as before. While the reason that they were slow was lack of money in the first place! :confused:

Edited June 24, 2012 by zoog

[BOTA:16 0]

If you're referring to my 'nitpicking' (and I'm pretty sure you are); ideas are all well and good but where money's concerned you absolutely must have faith that it's going to be used wisely because Kickstarter offers no guarantees, that's where it falls down for me - I don't see that these guys are necessarily deserving of the best part of a half million dollars capital to chance without any accountability or personal risk (given they'll be paying themselves a wage all the while). If they did realise their entire feature list I'd certainly buy the game even though I dislike the Unreal engine (another reason I'm not keen on the project and now slightly dark on Takedown). However I see no grounds at all for your blind faith that they will (in fact I think the small but obviously zealous following around this project are a trifle soft in the head), after five years and 'countless thousands of dollars from their life savings' there's hardly anything to show, certainly compared to what volunteer mod teams are routinely able to achieve for free in their spare time. Again, sorry if you don't like my take on things or see me as having a 'superiority complex' (wut?), but you're going to encounter divergent viewpoints on an Internet discussion forum, some of them might actually be based on sound reasoning.

Directed at you? Not necessarily. But after reading your others posts on this topic, I guess I can see how it would look like that. And it would be a waste of time to try and change your mind with any kind of logic and just makes me ask why would you even post in this thread to begin with?

there's hardly anything to show, certainly compared to what volunteer mod teams are routinely able to achieve for free in their spare time.

That comment there just shows your ignorance or you are just trolling.

[batto 17]

That comment there just shows your ignorance or you are just trolling.

Defunkt is right. There are already some good and not so trivial games (not just ArmA mods) done by volunteers in spare time for no money.

Don't get me wrong. I'd really like to see this game finished. I wonder why don't they take loan...

[BOTA:16 0]

Defunkt is right. There are already some good and not so trivial games (not just ArmA mods) done by volunteers in spare time for no money.

Don't get me wrong. I'd really like to see this game finished. I wonder why don't they take loan...

Could you please point me to them?

[Mr. Charles 22]

Could you please point me to them?

Try http://store.steampowered.com/app/17700/

[BOTA:16 0]

Try http://store.steampowered.com/app/17700/

Yes, played it quite abit. Beppo, the lead programmer for Infiltration has helped with Ground Branch.

Infiltration was first released in 1999 (13 years ago). The last update was released in 2003.

Edited June 24, 2012 by BOTA:16

[Mr. Charles 22]

Not modern warfare, but quite realistic and authentic:

Don't forget PR.

[sic-disaster 311]

AMA! http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/vjam4/indie_game_developer_ground_branch_by_blackfoot/

I tried Resistance and Liberation, as well as Insurgency, but neither of them managed to grip me. They both feel really clunky, and especially Insurgency had maps that were complete crap. Ins feels a bit better in terms of gameplay than R&L, because R&L was nearly unplayable to me. I guess it comes down to the Source engine which is an action game engine and imo completely unsuitable to tactical gaming. I have yet to see one work on that engine.

Project Reality is good though, that can't be denied, and it's quite the achievement. Especially considering it's free. But what do you guys want to prove with this? That from now on any tactical shooter should come for free, with no cost to you at all? That's a bit unfair don't you think?

[batto 17]

@BOTA:16:

Here you go:

http://www.xonotic.org/

http://springrts.com/

http://red.planetarena.org/

http://www.openttd.org/

Note that they work on everything. They don't use UT engine.

These are games I played or play. There can be more.