Welcome to Serellan LLC

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About BlackManINC

  • Rank
    Private First Class

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Gaming Platform PC
  1. Part of the problem is the people themselves that comprise much of the Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six community these days, at least those over at Ubi Softs forum. Most of them can't even give a solid suggestion as to how Wildlands should play because they haven't even played the first damn game, or many other games that's more realistic than Call of Duty. Most of the clowns haven't even heard of games like Swat 4 or Full Spectrum Warrior. Whenever they make a suggestion, its always from other arcadish pieces of garbage like 'The Division'. They are a bunch of kids and couldn't give two sh!ts about how the first game played, or even Ghost Recon 2 for that matter. This is the community that Ubi Soft has been getting as of late. If they are the ones they are listening too, then only an intervention from God would redeem the Tom Clancy brand from being flushed further down the toilet than it already is. If Ubi Soft had stuck to the realism of Ghost Recon 1, and the improved gameplay elements of Ghost Recon 2 (command & squad interface was much better), we would have had what amounts to a poor mans version of Arma 3, and by poor mans, I mean in terms of realism. This is what Blackfoot Studios aims to achieve with the video game Ground Branch, and its why I'm looking forward to that game as well. Epsilon = Rainbow Six Ground Branch = Ghost Recon H-Hour = Socom
  2. Meaning that because of companies like Serellan and BlackFootStudios, there is still hope yet. We just have to be patient.
  3. Below are a stack of videos from Ghost Recon 1 and a game called 'Close Combat: First to fight'. The firing and maneuver tactics displayed in these videos are of course done mostly by player controlled characters, but they illustrate exactly the point I've made in a previous thread concerning pushing the envelope for A.I development. Some of these videos are more proper for open battlefield games like Ghost Recon or Arma, but since most of the videos take place in urban environments, I'm sure the A.I team here can find some use for these tactics for Epsilons close quarters combat. I want to know if its at all possible to get A.I to behave like a team to this extent with today's computing power? it would be revolutionary if it can.
  4. On to the room clearing. I think the command to clear a room should be a little more complex than what Serellan is probably planning on doing with the planning map, especially if you have multiple teams. It should be more than just setting way points, and telling them to "open & clear". I noticed that whenever you tell your squad or team to clear a room, they only stop at the door and then continue on with the way points set. What if its a big room and I want them to actually clear the entire room before moving onto the next way point? I should be able to tell them to either stop at the door and then continue with the route, or I can tell them to clear the entire room BEFORE moving onto the next waypoint beyond the room. This would push the envelope pass what was done with the squad commands and planning map in Raven Shield. One thing that I thought was improved in Vegas was the way the A.I cleared the rooms itself. In Raven Shield, they stopped too short of the door, like I'm seeing thus far with Epsilon. The video below best illustrates how I would like to see the A.I clear the room. These are player controlled characters demonstrating some proper room clearing, basically showing how they more or less behave in Vegas. Notice how spaced out they are after they enter a room. They break off and hug the walls, and cover all sectors of the room unlike what you'll see with the A.I in Epsilon and Raven Shield where they always stop just short of the door. The ability to tap another player on the shoulder to let him know I'm ready to move would be a neat feature as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tUSiVN5aq8
  5. You mean for Vegas or for Epsilon? From what I saw in some Youtube videos for Epsilon, you had to use a scroll menu just to tell them to stack up, which is totally unnecessary. For Vegas, I'm not sure how it was done on the PC, I had Vegas on the console. I don't see how the intuitiveness would be any less on the PC, considering you have even more buttons. In any case, it should be as simple as a point and click. Once you tell them to stack up, perhaps with the space bar, there would be a button for each and every command depending on the rules of engagement you have them in and the state of the door as shown below. ROE - Assault (Door is Closed) Breach and Clear Open and Clear Open, Frag, and Clear ROE - Assault (Door is Open) Flash and Clear Clear Frag and Clear ROE - Infiltration (Door in any state) Flash and Clear Open and Clear Smoke and Clear I'm not sure how the planning map should be done since its in-game. Will there be multiple teams at a time or just one squad? I think the planning map should be as detailed as it was in Raven Shield, where at any point, you can change the rules of engagement for each squad, have them report each point as a "milestone", change the rules of engagement, and give them go codes. In any case, I would design the control scheme as if I'm making it for the console with only sixteen buttons available instead of 100 buttons to ensure its as intuitive as possible. The squad control scheme in Vegas was perfect for this very reason.
  6. I can see that the squad command interface is like the command interface for Raven Shield PC where you have to scroll through a list of layered menu's to get the order you want to give. The squad command interface was actually the one thing that I can say was a true improvement in the Vegas series over its predecessors. It had all of the same squad commands as Raven Shield, they just made it intuitive to use. Instead of scrolling through a menu just to tell your squad to stack up and clear a room, in the Vegas games it was as simple as pointing at a door and pressing a button, as easy as it gets. This is how it should be done in Epsilon. A scroll menu would only take the fun and immersion out of the game itself. Raven Shield:
  7. The bold part is where we actually get to something important, never mind the non-existent realistic weapon mechanics as I've already addressed it. So the excuse for the A.I being trash is because its "just a demo"? Well, based on the link below, I estimate that this game has been in development for at least four years now. What in the blue hell have they been doing since 2012 besides making bogus trailers that we now know for sure isn't at all representative of the current stage of the product? Were they on an extended vacation? Were they having a massive orgy party at Ubi-Soft? What is the real reason here? "Just a demo" ain't a valid excuse. At this point, we should have seen something special, something more than the Hollywood trash we got at E3. We should have gotten more than the typical empty headed, cookie cutter A.I that we've seen for the last sixteen years. There is a real excuse, but "just a demo" ain't one of them. This is supposed to be a realistic tactical shooter, yet here we go with this Wolverine health system again. That's exactly what the regenerating health system should be called because that's exactly what it is. I'm of the firm opinion that gameplay should actually make sense, and regenerating health only makes sense for a character like Wolverine, because his health actually regenerates, he's a freaking mutant. The Ghosts aren't mutants, they aren't a bunch of Deadpool characters and they ain't no Master Chiefs, so it has no place whatsoever in Ghost Recon. I don't understand the logic behind giving us wolverine health, obviously because there is no logic behind it as a game design decision, its stupid and the only reason they put it there is to appease the Call of Duty, Halo 12 year old, half wit fanboys. Based on Ubi-Soft's track record, you can rest assured that it will be in the retail version of the game. Why wouldn't it be, they have been in love with the sh!t since the advent of Rainbow Six Vegas. Link: How long has this game been in development? (as of 2015) The Sad Reality of Ghost Recon Wildlands: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWDQqI9JeIE
  8. Well, I don't know what all that rabble was about with the weapons supposedly having realistic mechanics. Other than the one/two shot kills which I can get even in Call of Duty, I saw nothing about the weapons that can be called realistic in the slightest. They didn't demonstrate any bullet drop and there was no recoil to speak of. With the hype about how realistic the weapons are supposed to be, I`m expecting something we`ve only seen in Arma 3, where every weapon and bullet will do its own damage based on distance, armor, and where you hit the target. I`m expecting realistic mechanics as to how weapons interact with the environment. It was done in R6: Siege, now lets push the envelope in Ghost Recon. As for the A.I, again, its average at best. Its largely the same AI we have seen since Ghost Recon 1. There was nothing about the AI that was noteworthy. I also would have rather seen the friendly AI than the typical player vs AI we always get. I would have been far more impressed to see what was demonstrated with other players be done with AI teammates. That would have been revolutionary. Instead, we get scripted Hollywood trash. Most players don`t talk or play with that level of coordination especially on the consoles, so lets cut the bull sh!t and show us something real.I would also like to be given the ability to short the plugs in the truck or rig it so that El pozolero couldn`t use it to escape, to begin with, or the ability to plant spikes on the road or some kind of road side bomb just in case he gets away. These are the kinds of gameplay features I needed to see in the demonstration as well as from here on in to get me interested, because what I`ve seen so far ain`t about nothing. Really, the whole game just looked like a scripted Michael Bay action movie with the typical trash dialogue.
  9. I haven't played the mod in years, I just remember the A.I being so bad ass that talking about Ghost Recon reminded me of it. From what I can tell, the shooting from a distance is still a problem but the way the enemy behaves overall is drastically more realistic than the vanilla A.I, and most games A.I to this day. I'm installing it again to play and I'l try and upload it on YouTube, to at the very least show Serellan what can be done with sixteen year old code, so that there is no excuses for seeing the same generic sh!tty A.I we've seen since the good old days of Tom Clancy gaming.
  10. Anybody ever played this mod before for Ghost Recon 1? The link to it is provided below. I posted this here because the A.I in this mod should be the standard for how both the enemy and friendly A.I should be programmed in any military shooter. You should all install Ghost Recon 1 and play this mod to appreciate what I'm talking about, as its some of the best A.I I've ever seen from any shooter, better than 99% of the shooting games today. It surpasses the A.I even in Arma 3 in my opinion. Perhaps I'll upload a Youtube video of it at some point. The enemy is very well organized, they move in formation, and very carefully. They will suppress you, flank you, lob grenades at will, and hunt you down like a dog if they think they know where you are. If you let up one bit and lose focus, you could get flanked and under heavy fire fairly quickly. Not a very detailed description, but its one of the few instances that I've seen in a game where the enemy will actually fight like real trained soldiers, and not like amateurs. Its too bad this AI never got modded for the whole game because it would have made the game twice as good than it already was. Link: Bot Hunt V2
  11. Video speaks for itself concerning the rabble called the "gaming community". The difference between the speaker in the video concerned and me, is I'm not at all bashful about stating that the game will most likely turn out sh!t ahead of seeing anything of it knowing Ubi-Soft's track record. Its not rocket science, if Uwe Boll was making another movie, you can rest assured it will stink up the joint.
  12. How long have these gamer's been fans of the Ghost Recon franchise? What do they consider to be "staying true to the franchise" when it really hasn't since the first one? Do they even know what it means? I can't say for sure what "staying true to the franchise" means since we've never seen the series reach anywhere near its potential in the first place. I reckon that it could have potentially been something akin to what Blackfoot studios is trying to achieve with Ground Branch, a less demanding, "poor mans" version of Arma, but we won't know exactly what that means until we see it. I'll only accept the opinions of those who have been fans since the first one, because they actually have a real grasp of what they were originally shooting for, all others are null and void.
  13. The video below speaks to the very core of my being concerning the state of Ubi Soft games lately, Tom Clancy games in particular. If I was Tom Clancy, I would be insulted at how far down the toilet Ubi Soft has taken the name "Tom Clancy" with the recent iterations of Rainbow Six, Splinter Cell and Ghost Recon. I haven't payed a Ubi Soft game in a very long time. I didn't care for Rainbow Six: Siege because I would be paying full price for less than half the content, no single player campaign, no Co-Op, equals an automatic fail in my book, I don't care how good the gameplay looks, it doesn't deserve sixty of my bucks. I mean, the levels don't even have freaking doors, and last I've seen, in the real world, rooms will typically have real doors attached to them. Five on Five multiplayer isn't that impressive at all to me, neither is the A.I in Terrorist Hunt. The least they could have done with the multiplayer was make it ten versus ten, or eight versus eight, since eight players was the maximum allowed in Raven Shields campaign mode. As for Wildlands, I don't understand why people get their hopes up for this game. Us hardcore fans was expecting Ubi Soft to actually expand on the realism they aimed to achieve in the first Ghost Recon and actually give us something different than the typical shooter we see, especially on the consoles. If Ubi Soft actually stuck to their guns, we could have gotten a kick a$$ poor mans version of Arma 3. I would be so hyped for this game if I had seen any semblance of realism that this series should have been known for, but the game just looks too arcadish to me. Attention to detail is not Ubi Soft's concern as they have proven time and again, so I'm pretty sure there won't even be any bullet drop with all that open space and the A.I, as we've seen in pretty much every Ghost Recon game of the past, will be as mediocre as its ever been since the first one. Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VowECbbhq7E