So a trailer for the new Ghost Recon has been released...now i'm a big fan of the GR series, GRAW & GRAW 2 go down as some of my fav titles on the 360 to date. i love squad battles so i'm hoping it's more of the same..not so sure about the futuristic'ness of what the trailer is hinting at but i'm giving them the benefit of the doubt for now. MP beta this summer adds to the long list of games to look forward to this year (could it be the best year yet?)
What i'm really hoping for is MP gameplay that really encourages and rewards teamwork, it doesn't necessarily have to come from this particular title but since it's got such a strong emphasis on teamwork in the SP games i'd hope it would follow through. I'm a bit sick of these MP games and gametypes which are labeled "team" deathmatch, ctf etc yet there's a distinct lack of teamwork involved and the games are too heavily rewarding to those who can get the most kills (*cough MW2 cough*). So using MW2 as reference...dont get me wrong i love a bit of run and gun now and again but i really love objective gametypes but find it hard to form a "team". So often i play and i'd say 99% of the Live community have got mic's but nobody uses them for informative communication...one the rare occasion i have played with a "team" i've found the game a much more enjoyable experience. How about removing individual leaderboards altogether and only displaying a team score for matches, or on objective gametypes boost the points and rewards for capturing, 'capture streak awards' to replace kill streaks anyone?
My hat goes off to Zipper, the guys behind MAG on the PS3 the game might not play as nice as MW2 but there's so much more emphasis on teamwork and rewards..just incase anyones missed this one, it's basically a 256 player battle and it's not a total mess like you'd think. each teams broken down into squads which have leaders and these leaders can issue commands, like capture point A and if you do so as you should the willing team player you are, any kills around that point you get bonus XP, it's little incentives like this which might help combat this lonewolf mindset so many players have.
Maybe i'm just not hanging/playing with players with the same motivations as i have, i like to think of myself as an 'active' player in online gaming, i'll hold my hands up and admit i have my occasional rant and rave about lag etc but majority of the time i'm spewing out locations of enemies, asking for backup etc.
So anyway wat initially started as a post about Ghost Recon games has turned into a full blown rant, was just posting to take my mind of work for a few mins...which has now turned to well lots of minssssss. back to work and interested to hear any thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Solid points! Team Deathmatch is basically just regular deathmatch, but the scores are added together and (for the most part) you can't kill everyone you see, just half of them.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure I'll get my head bit off here, but I still think Halo has one of the best team oriented MPs out there. Even in a regular game of Slayer, communication is key, and calling out enemy locations and intel (even post death) can really make the difference for one team over another.
I wish as a group, we tried some of the other playlists that come with our favorite games. I still remember the flag runner video that swept the web pre-MW2 launch, and I still have yet to play a single game of capture the flag. It just might mean that we need to stop looking at our K/D stats once in a while, and focus on the objective.
Good rant Skatch. Also, good timing on your comments because I think this relates directly to several conversations I have had with 3N3MY recently regarding multiplayer games, especially FPS, and how he specifically loses interest in them so quickly. His points were that he just doesn't understand how we can continuously play a game day after day in the exact same ways AND despite our continuous gripes. My response was that I can see past that if I am playing with a good group of guys but if I wasn't, I wouldn't be playing it as often.
ReplyDeleteTaking both his, Skatch's, and Amateria's comments into consideration one thing stands out: We have at least 5 guys in this blog that I have personally played countless hours with and know for certain that we all feel exactly the same way (sorry Juniper, I've never played with you). Why do we not, as a group, make a specific effort to play TOGETHER, and play team games... AS A TEAM? We all know each other, and how each other plays, the only thing missing is an effort from each of us.
I know that we/I mention this often but take a look at how we used to play Halo back in college. We almost always played CTF. Why? Not because Team Deathmatch wasn't fun, but because the and communication that was needed in order to win outweighed ANY single person's effort. Yes I may get 120 kills (in a 3hr match) as opposed to 3N3MY's 50 but if he wasn't sitting back hiding like a coward.... I mean, defending the base, we wouldn't have stood a chance. We each had our rolls, and everyone knew everyone’s strengths (was there anyone better at defending the "grassy knoll" than Jeremy?).
My point is that I think we definitely need to make an effort to play these other games and game types more often. This will not only help prevent a game from getting stale but we will also get a whole hell of a lot more enjoyment out of the games we play.
Everyone offers great points and YES I was defending the base brjahu. Every time I left or left someone else in charge the flag would disappear. You all admitted time and time again that it was a bitch playing against me when I was guarding the base b/c I took that role very seriously.
ReplyDeleteLike I said you guys have good points and maybe different game types would be good, but I think that MW2 will ultimately lack as a good "team" based feel as we're searching for since the size of most maps are quite small. Brjahu and I have gone round and round on Battlefield games (juniper...we already know you're crazy gay for them) and we can't recommend them highly enough. The size of the maps and different/multiple objectives varies the game immensely. Brjahu and I would almost always run together to secure and take flag points and honestly it's to this day some of the most fun I've had on 360 (I think we work together as well as we do because we have similar play styles, but that's a different discussion).
I'm willing to try whatever on MW2, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't burned out by the game. Not that the maps aren't good, but just that they're only so many of them and none of them are that big so battles vary little from game to game. Also, with maps of this size I'm sure anything team based we try we'll be trounced on b/c the other team will have everything covered and camped.
As far as K/D ratio bashing goes I can't help but think I'm the most team oriented player. Because if our scores our lumped together I'm pulling more than my own weight and since I only play with you guys....
I'm still getting Bad Company 2 at launch. I think it's just what I need in my FPS frustration (points based instead of kill based!!!). I've talked with brjahu about it and he's informed me that skatch is on the fence as well. I have one other guy on my FL that's getting it for sure. That's a full squad by my count.....
I'm no longer on the fence with it, definately a first day purchase for me, just played some more of the demo there and really enjoying it...have we all got the demo, perhaps some squading up this weekend for a blast?
ReplyDeleteAmateria...i actually agree with you Halo is very team orientated if you wish to succeed, i think it's a combination of the smaller teams, map designs and that you can survive a few bullets so you can do a bit of reconnaissance work without the worry of being capped from across the map. I feel the same way about Gears, specifically the first one i felt that b/c there was only 4 players per team it was much easier to orientate yourself within the team. i've no idea why Infinity Ward have removed Team Tactical from the playlist (is it there as 3rd person acutally? i'm sure someone will correct me)
I agree about the team tactical. That was probably my favorite playlist on MW1. I find that 3v3 or 4v4 provides for some of the best games.
ReplyDeleteI will make this known now. If there is enough of us willing to make the jump for BC2, I will get it at launch BUT we all need to make the extra effort to coordinate times when we can all (or most with Skatch being half a world away) get together and play.
Yes, 3N3MY, I am crazy gay for the Battlefield series. I think for those of us who started on Battlefield games, the MW series just didn't cut it. MW2 was a good step in the right direction from MW1 but still fell short when it comes to team-based play. The guys in my clan are all kind of like that, though we enjoy getting high scores and what not, the foundation of the games we want to play is team-based.
ReplyDeleteJust last night, four of us were playing the BC2 beta. Our squad alone took almost all of the objectives while the other 12 players on our team were useless, as usual. We had taken two objectives and were pushing towards the next two while our whole team was still in our former base, LOL! It's cuz we know how to work as a team. Someone needs ammo so one of us spawns as assault or there's a tank nearby so we spawn as engineer or recon.
Anyways... it's fun times. Like 3N3MY, I enjoy camp... I mean, defending objectives. If everybody pulls the lone wolf, run n gun attitude, nothing gets accomplished on game modes with objectives like domination (conquest in the battlefield games) or CTF or Demolition or whatever.
I played the demo for BC2. I enjoyed it, but I thought to myself, "With everything on such a big scale, I really think this would only be fun if I had a team of guys that I know and could communicate with." My experience with the XBL community has led me to believe that this would NEVER happen with a bunch of random people, since generally people: 1. Are silent, 2. Are calling you a fag, or (my personal favorite) 3. Are telling you that you suck or "you're garbage at this game."
ReplyDeleteAll this to say that I was thinking along the same lines as brjahu. If we all had this, I'd be all about it and would probably consider getting rid of MW2 (trading it in, maybe?). I mean, if we all had BC2, we wouldn't be playing much MW2 anymore, right? Half the time, I'm just upset in MW2 at people using Maraton-Lightweight-Commando Tactical Knife or that AA Shotgun or Akimbo Rangers.
Wow. I missed this post. I wonder if anyone's even going to read this.
ReplyDeleteAt this point, I would like to point out that MW2 isn't all kill-based, we just haven't done anything that isn't. Domination is essentially the Conquest mode from Battlefield, and us being the capture the flag veterans we are in Halo, haven't even tried it in MW2. In no way am I trying to say that it will level out the game for us, but we all own it, may as well give it a shot before we all drop another 60 bucks.
Now to go down the list -
Defending the base is a loose way to phrase camping. If I ever saw you leave that front door, I was shocked.
My personal best in a 3 hour game of CTF on halo, was over 300 kills. (no BS)
I can't believe that Lead Salad suggested selling a game, regardless of which on it is.
I probably won't be getting this one. We'll see how much I change my mind if everyone has it, but I feel so silly hopping from shooter to shooter with hopes and dreams that maybe this one will be different. Maybe this one no one will cheat. Maybe this one I'll be the best in. Maybe this one I'll have more success. Maybe this one looks better. Pick your poison.
IF I do end up getting BC2, I can say with almost 100% certainty that I WON'T be going up against people with Marathon-Lightweight-Commando-Tactical Knife warping through space and time, cutting off my nuts and serving them to me on a platter. At least there would be THAT.
ReplyDeleteWhile I'm thinking of it, I'll just ask since most of you have played more Battlefield games than me (I think I've only played the demo for BC, BC2, and 1943): Are there consistent problems with 'Battlefield' games? If so, what are they?
Lead Salad: I can't think of 1 consistent problem simply b/c they have a tried and true methodology to their games and they stick by them. They do enhance their games (blowing a wall out of a building for example), but it's always for the better.
ReplyDeleteI've owned and played ALL Battlefield games on 360. Battlefield 2, Bad Company, 1943 and in another couple of weeks Bad Company 2.
The games are a BLAST and crazy amounts of fun when working with SIMILARLY skilled and like minded teammates. Not a friend that's trying it out or just got it b/c they drag down the team (friends of people on this blog come to mind). Is this mean? Probably, but I'm tired of being on a team and having someone's buddy join and they single handed lose the game for us. I like playing for fun, but as I get older in gaming I want to play to win. Take that however you want.
Points based games like Battlefield means it pays BIG time to go for objectives and actually help teammates (heal them/drop ammo...depends on your class). Not just go for kills like people keep bragging about in this post. Who cares if you had a million kills? If you didn't have someone guarding the flag and constantly returning it to base your kills wouldn't mean anything cause you'd lose. Keep talking about working as a team and bagging on me for having least amount of kills when I was the goal keeper????
I can say with absolute certainty that there isn't one person in this blog that would have less fun playing BC2 than they do in MW2. The Battlefield games are just that good. Even when brjahu and I played the step child Battlefield 2 with clunky aiming and goofy controls it was an absolute blast. Here's a regular conversation between brjahu and I in Battlefield 2:
"Me: Where are you?
brjahu: At the spawn come pick me up.
*swing by in the jeep (which doesn't control like a turd with wheels) and grab him*
Me: We jumping the gap for flag 1 or we going for flag 4 on the bridge?
brjahu: Looks like we just lost flag 4. Prob a lot of enemies. Head for flag 1.
Me: Jump out and cover me.
brjahu: TANK!
Me: AHHHHHHH! *jump out of the jeep and throw C4 and try to take him out and die shortly there after*
brjahu: Still pinned down by the tank.
Me: I'm catching a ride in the chopper."
Then basically you just jump your ass out the chopper and parachute down to help. Good luck doing ANY of that in MW2 because you can't even control vehicles in it.
Bad Company 2 FTW. It's the better game by a long shot.
Oh yeah....no perks! And while you do have "noob tubes" they have virtually zero splash damage so they're ineffective one on one in the open...unlike MW2.
What a huge fanboy post. No one here has even played the finished product, how can anybody make that reliable of a claim?
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying it won't be true, it's just jumping the gun a little.
I'm also a little irritated at having to by a new shooter every 3 months since the last one we got wasn't good enough (regardless of how frustrating they may be)
If the PC beta, PS3 beta, and 360 demo are any indication whatsoever of what the finished product will be like, it's going to be amazing. There's a LOT of positive reviews for them all. I spent my work bonus on upgrades for this game after playing the beta, it was that awesome. Not to mention no other series of games as EVER swallowed up as much of my time as the Battlefield games.
ReplyDelete