Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

vini_lessa

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    44

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by vini_lessa

  4. Posted

    Yeah, I don't like the direction that Ghost Recon is going. It's going down the wrong road; its not what it should be. It's suppose to be a tactical shooter not COD... oh wait, that was back in the days until Ubisoft bought Redstorm.

    Yeah, the series seems to have reached the bottom with Future Soldier. I didnt play it yet, but all reviewers say its more of a CoD than a GR. To be frank, I actually liked GRAW1/2 on X360 - even with console trappings and simplification, I found its somewhat open levels and tech-gadgets like drones, etc fun to play. But this time they went too far it seems.

    BTW, Im playing the original Ghost Recon right now. Bought it and expansions for very cheap on Steam. And Im using two interesting mods that I reccomend: heroes unleashed, that enhances AI, textures, interface, weapons, etc. and ENBseries that enhances gfx, adding bloom effect, lighting, surface reflections, transparency, etc. ;)

  5. Posted

    Do you guys know its a promo movie for their new game Ghost Recon: Call of Duty.. oops Future Soldier, dont you ? (its a prequel for the game, whose plot advances the "rogue spearead" warheads incident, as I understand it )

    Anyway, the film is really cool. I think I saw "Ridley Scott" in the end credits. Is this guy the real Ridley Scott ?

  6. Posted · Edited by vini_lessa

    Great video, Mr Bump. In that case, not only the AI moved between rooms, but moved in group. Cool.

    Another thing I like about SWAT3/4 AI is that it seems to have hidden morale and agressiveness atributes, giving it a very life-like unpredictness. Some enemies will give up on the first shout, some wont give up untill shot and shocked, and some will give up at first but then rise again and shoot you or then taking their weapon and running screaming, all the while speaking different and very appropriated expressions (like the one from the video "fuck, I wont die for this!").

    By the way, on this hidden atributes thing - wouldnt it be interesting if ARMA had it too ? To be frank I never noticed this in the game myself (eg: it wasnt apparent if Razor team - Coops, Scarlet, Sykes and Robo - was really differentiated abilities-wise). Anyway, I think something like this would be interesting:

    159377-tom-clancy-s-rainbow-six-windows-screenshot-team-selections.png

    Or maybe making these atributes hidden, and just describing/suggesting the abilites in each soldier profile. This way would be more realistic and in line with ARMA premisse, I think.

  7. Posted

    Batto, I actually have Raven Shield, but I don’t like its single-player campaign much. I think it deviated somehow from the planning emphasis of the originals to a more SWAT-like on-the-fly tactical action. Not that it’s a bad thing per se, but in case of R6 Im more a planner then a player, and always loved its “20 min planning, 2 min execution†thing. I even took more time watching the replays than actually “playing†the game, and finished RSpear in commander chair/watch mode in elite level. XD

    By the way, I bought both Raven Shield and Ghost Recon through Steam for very cheap. You may want to take look there.

  8. Posted · Edited by vini_lessa

    Another game that I feel deserves mention for its "tactical tightness" is GRAW2 (for X360, not the PC version). Despite some console trappings, its tactical aspect is one of the best Ive seen (easily the best there is for a console ), and a great example of easiness of use and responsiveness we´re talking about here.

    P.S: tried to play Rogue Spear here but no sucess. The game wont run on Win7 with ATI cards. Damn. :(

  9. Posted

    Hehe, lot of familiar faces around here! Metal from the codex and Smurf from adrenaline, how are you guys ? ;)

    Well, on the SWAT4 matter I think I agree more with Smurf, even if Metal has a good point. In my experience (finished Swat3 and reached mission 11 on Swat4 ) the enemies are in fact randomly placed and they DO react when they hear or sense you by opening/checking out doors, shouting things out ("what da fuck!?", "Who is there?", etc), and even panicking. On the other hand, I think they could be a bit smarter sometimes and actually shoot doors or look (and shoot) through windowns, etc.

    Anyway, I think SWAT4 is the appex of CQB tactics, surpassing anything else (R6s and H&Ds included) in interface functionality and teammates AI behaviour. What brings us to my original point:

    The degree of "tactical tightness" seen in SWAT3/4 is light-years ahead of ARMA´s. And by "tactical tightness" here I mean teammates responsiveness, precision in executing maneuvers, and capacity to react to new situations - I can play the game just giving orders and watching my teammates do it, and they will do their jobs most of the time. While in (vanilla) ARMA2 not only the command interface seems awkward and labour-intensive to operate (resulting in high-risk operation if you encounter yourself in a hot firefight), but the tactical behaviour of your teammates is inconsistent at best. God knows how many times in the SP campaign I tried to execute simple commands like suppress, fix-and-flank, cover, retreat, etc. just to see the AI not responding in the way I intended, or taking too long to do so, or simply not doing anything at all ! Its really frustrating, and ends up with me doing almost everything by myself and simply giving the most basic of commands to my teammates (like changing stances and RoE).

    Now, I see 2 valid counterarguments here:

    1. The ARMA series environment is much more complex than the other games cited. Thus its much more difficult for the AI to asess all variables involved in a fast and flawless manner, resulting in a more unpredictable and inconsistent tactical behaviour (but a more realistic one, one could argue). Well, I totally agree with this. At the same though, this argument somehow helps to validate my original point: the game´s drive for realism and simulation made its tactical aspect feel "fragile" in comparison to the other less "simulationistic" games.

    2. "Vini you moron, you didnt play the game recently did you? They released a lot of patches and mods that enchance your teammates AI tactical behaviour greatly!". If thats really the case, please tell me. Because I played the hell out of ARMA2 when it came out (stopped in last mission due to a game-breaking bug) and in that state the AI really felt fragile tactically - I remember there was a suppresive-fire command that simply didnt work; there was this issue where no fast retreat was possible because the AI entered a "bounce-dancing" [playing "

    " for those from Brasil :icon_mrgreen: ] whenever a enemy was nearby; I remember setting up and coordinating fireteams was a chore; And I remember the impossibility to give and stack waypoints on the map for them (the fireteams) to follow. If those things were addressed somehow, just tell me and I will gladly reassess the situation (I will even reinstall my game here).

    P.S:

    The problem with Rainbow Six's planning is that you can't change it mid-operation [you should be able to do it in realtime]

    Ghost Recon does this. You dont have a "planning phase" like in R6, but you can create on-the-fly "plans" in a very easy manner - just set (stackable) waypoints, fire-arcs, RoEs, etc. and give "go-codes". And the game is set in open-area environments like ARMA (its a military engagement game, not a counter-terrorism one). Just remember to use some gfx enhancing mods if you try it today, because its from 2001 (same year as CWC).

    P.S²:

    This "CoC" mod seems exactly the thing that could enhance the command interface. Its not for ARMA 2 ?

  11. Posted

    Hello there boys and girls,

    Im on that period of the year (again) when I must play a lot of tactical shooters. Thus Ive been playing Rainbow Six, Ghost Recon, GRAW, SWAT, Full Spectrum Warrior, Hidden & Dangerous, etc. for the last weeks. And I noticed something interesting that I would like to share, and hear your opinions about.

    See, all the games cited have, in their single-player modes, have very efficient squad-based tactical functionalities - you issue orders through a simple and intuitive interface and your teammates (in general) execute it quickly and precisely. In ArmA/OFP:CWC, though, the tactical aspect always felt very unreliable to me: the interface is convoluted, making the issuing of orders and management/coordination of your soldiers/fireteams very awkward and slow ("weapons hold, go to house, turn north, lay low, weapons free"). And the teammates behave erraticaly at best - I remember simple commands like suppressive fire, flank, take cover, etc. being executed poorly, with teammates sometimes taking too long to follow the order, and other times simply doing anything at all (eg: one issue I remember is the impossibility to make a quick retreat in ARMA2 because your teammates would adopt a slow "bouncing-dance" advancing if there are enemies around; ). So the overall feel is that, despite being an unsurpassed experience in the sense of "being there" in the skin of a real soldier in a real war, the series always had a somewhat inconsistent and unreliable tactical aspect.

    This always made me consider it a great soldier sim, but a not so great tactical shooter, if that makes any sense.

    What are your opinions on it ?

  12. Posted

    I will say that I was pleasantly surprised with Cooper in Arma 2. A bilingual black guy in a war game who is apprehensive about the leadership role thrust upon him but maintains a high degree of professionalism, who isn't ghetto as hell, does not shout something everytime he kills someone, and is disturbed by some of the deaths that he sees? Holy shit.

    I do wish that they would have explored some of the relationships between the men a little more. Like Scarlett never got much shit for being Navy, Robo was just a douche bag and pretty much got away with it without any banter from his teammates, and Sykes was just a statue most of the game.

    This. For good and for bad.

  13. Posted

    Sorry to be blunt but..

    WHAT DA FUCK IS THE TOPIC AUTHOR TALKING ABOUT ? :confused:

    The original ARMA2´s main campaign ( Harvest Red ) has all that - mass graves, ethnic-cleaning/murdering, civil unrest, political assassinations, etc.

    The author seems to have played OA´s "campaign" and thought all "series" is like that. (when in fact, OA´s campaign is the only one shallow and sanitized as he says - I dont consider the ARMA1 campaign a campaign at all.).

  14. Posted · Edited by vini_lessa

    Yeah. Harvest Red lost me when it became an RTS game but, really, it is the best portrayal of an SOF team in any game I've ever played. The missions where you have to troll throughout the countryside looking for clues and hunting for particular bad guys are my favorite.

    I love Flashpoint, Red Hammer, and Resistance's campaigns, but Harvest Red was special.

    Armed Assault was special too, but in a bad way

    Exacly my toughts. ;)

  15. Posted

    welcome to the real world SF team

    as one of my NCOs (former SF) said: "We're just glorified school teachers. we teach the local kids to kill our enemies."

    i liked the first missions of HR. they were pretty authentic SF type stuff in an asymmetric environment. not the standard type of "SF" mission as portrayed in most community missions (and other games in industry).

    THIS.

    Harvest Red missions are the most authentic portrayal Ive ever seen for a Special Forces unit in any game, OFP included. Actually they are the FIRST time I see it. All other games in industry treat Spec Ops as modern-day ninjas (hollywoodian type).

  19. Posted · Edited by vini_lessa

    Almanzo, I respectfully disagree.

    I think your distaste for Harvest Red (and love for OFP) may be obscuring your judgement - In fact, all your points regarding the operational behaviour of Force Recon units are wrong. But first things first..

    Well, I have a few points to back that up. It seems like it all boils down to taste with this one. For me, I find the characters shallow and cheezy
    .

    Granted, some points are indeed cheesy. But others are not, and I think that in the end, the consistant and humanly reactions of group (like the group´s reaction to the mass grave in the beginning, or the killing of father Fiodor near the end) surpass the inconsistant and cheesy ones. On the other side, OFP also has some cheesy moments. For eg: the guy that is like a stereotypical war movies "the joker guy that everybody knows will die later" (the one with the small voice. Kozlowsky? ). He is a pile of cheesy quotes, in my opinion.

    But, in the end, this is your ONLY point prone to taste, as the others are all objectively wrong, at least according to wikipedia. Lets see..

    In real life, no special forces team would ever, ever engage an assault on any base ever. SF teams can be forward observers, saboteurs and so on, but they are never tasked with clearing out enemy bases

    According to this wiki entry, one type of mission used by SF around the globe is "Direct Action":

    in the context of military special operations, direct action (DA) consists of: "Short-duration strikes and other small-scale offensive actions conducted as a special operation in hostile, denied, or politically sensitive environments and which employ specialized military capabilities to seize, destroy, capture, exploit, recover, or damage designated targets. "[1]

    The United States and many allied countries consider DA one of the basic special operations missions. Some units specialize in it, such as the 75th Ranger Regiment, while other units, such as US Army Special Forces, have DA capabilities but focus more on other operations.

    Aside from that, this wiki entry cites one of the types of missions conducted by USA Force Recon companies..

    Black operations are the missions that require direct action (DA). They are the opposite of green operations missions, where the Force Recon operators basically "look for trouble". Depending on the situation and the target location, the FORECON operators usually conduct direct action missions within the artillery and naval gun support fan; these operations demonstrate "small-scale" shock and awe.

    Examples are the seizures and occupation of gas/oil platforms (GOPLAT) and the Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure (VBSS) of ships during Maritime Interdiction Operations (MIO), as well as orchestrating close air support, a vital skill exercised in DA missions

    Now the next point..

    Your pretty much dropped down on a 250 km2 map with a gun in your hand, 4 mates and a to-do list with places all over the area. Missions like this is well planned beforehand in real life, and the same team is not assigned on several tasks at once so far away from eachother leaving them to deside what to do when

    Well, that same wiki entry cites how they operate. Lets see..

    They are fully capable of operating independently behind enemy lines performing unconventional special operations, in cohesion of conventional warfare

    and..

    The Force Recon platoons operate farther inland than their division Recon counterparts, penetrating deeper into enemy territory from their assigned littoral (coastal) region within a force commander's 'tactical area of responsibility' (TOAR). They operate in such great distances that they are beyond the boundaries, or fan, of any artillery and/or naval gunfire support (NGFS); unlike their division Recon brethren, whose operations are strictly within the artillery and gunfire support fan.

    And about their versatility for getting out of their "default" surveilance niche..

    However, what began as a 'key hole' patrol could become a 'sting ray' patrol with little warning. The versatility of FORECON is demonstrated when missions quickly turn, planned or not, from a deep reconnaissance patrol to a direct action engagement.

    So, Almanza. As you see, the operational behavior of the Razor Team in-game is not beyond its real counter-part. Or at least, is not SO beyond it. The story necessities may make it a bit further, I agree (I tihnk the plot element of Miles killing by Lopotev may be the best justification here), but nothing that a exceptional situation in real life wouldnt ask for, in my humble opinion.

    On the other end, OFP: CWC has its share of unrealistic or suspect behaviors - as the Huey chopper pilot that ends piloting an A-10 Thunderbolt - is that realistic? Not at all..

    So, as I said in the beginning, it seems to me your love for OFP (and distaste for Harvest Red) are obscuring your judgement. That said, theres nothing wrong with you not liking HR, apples and oranges and all that. And hey - we´re on the same boat here man! ;)

  20. Posted · Edited by vini_lessa

    Down with all-mighty-Razors-and-warfare things !

    Oh come on, am I the only one who actually likes Harvest Red?

    Cant believe that. With the exception of some really flawed points (and premisses, as the awful last mission), I even think it has some nice aspects that OFP: CWC lacks - mainly the roleplaying element at some points (manhattan´s “Oblivion with guns†moments). Besides it, I think its story and premise is a really plausible one, depicting an armed conflict in a very realist way, with all the contact with population and the totally human reaction from the protagonists (Razor team) in various points in the plot (the group dialogue after

    father fiodor´s death comes to mind

    .

    Granted – I also think OFP: CWC is a more memorable experience overall, for its epicness and multi-angle storyline – but to dismiss Harvest Red as a bad campaign, as some people seem to imply, is totally unfair. If its played with the latest patch, it is a great experience (that beats easily all OFP expansions - Resistance, Red Hammer – in scope as in execution).

  21. Posted · Edited by vini_lessa

    I would like to observe that, while not reaching the greatness that OFP campaign´s had, ARMA 2 vanilla actually DO have a great campaign that contains elements from roleplaying and strategy genres well meshed with a nice story and great atmosphere. It was one of the most compelling gaming experiences I had in my life (I really got emotionally moved when I found out that

    the orthodox father was the head of the rebels

    , and that my decision in that moment would have a big impact in the outcome of the war).

    The problem with it is that its scope is too ambitious for the developers to implement, mainly the last 2 missions and Manhattan. I think if these missions were trimmed a bit ( and the game had more playtesting overall by the time of its lunching ), it would have received a much better response from fans and critics overall, and could even be praise as one of the greatest war experiences in gaming nowadays.

    That said, I agree with the topic autor and would like to suggest we create some kind of poll or signatures topic for establishing in a more acertive way the importance of the single-player campaign for the game community.

    Oh, and I agree with the coleague that sugested the developers could release a new campaign to OA through paid DLC (one that makes the game justice). I would pay for that.

  22. Posted · Edited by vini_lessa

    Hi there, it awlays bothered me as well (I felt like my grandma driving a car, with the face above the wheel ), so I changed it:

    You have a variable called "fovtop=X" and "fovleft=y" inside a config file in your profile ARMA folder (thats located inside your default "My Documments" windows folder).

    If you increase these values a bit, you get what you want. Mine for eg, Ive changed to this..

    (My gaming resolution is 1680x1050 )

    FOVtop=0.82

    FOVleft=1.31

    I suggest you try a setting that suits you, by playing with the numbers. ;)

×