• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About doubletap

  • Rank
    Ranger School Dropout
  • Birthday 02/25/1978

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Profile Fields

  • Platform
    PC and Console gamer
  1. What weapons do you own?

    I don't have many, I'm not rich so I spend more money on ammo and upgrades than on new guns. glock 19 (2) with factory night sights glock 22 (for sale to help pay for the 1911) glock 30 with meprolight sights springfeild champion operator 1911 I'm selling the glock 22 (.40sw) and sticking with 9mm and .45ACP exclusively. The 1911 was my last purchase for a while, I honestly have the three pistols I've wanted most, so I'm very content. Basically, like I said I now just buy mags and ammo ammo and more ammo.
  2. Spec Ops series on Playstation. All the games in the series got terrrible reviews but I had a blast playing them, frustrating as they were. I immediately went straight into playing as realistically as possible, and have never had an inclination to run and gun since. From the very start it was all about proper movement, and engaging the enemy on your terms, things like that. So I have those game to thank, I suppose, for starting out on the right track.
  3. What game are you playing while waiting for GB?

    GR Arma Forza 2 Nascar 09 (had to buy a second copy, pulled the first one out of the machine and crumbled it into a tiny crinkled mass - I have a problem with my temper with some games).
  4. Tactial Gameplay - What is it?

    Not all games are created equal when it comes to facilitating realistic tactics. Off the top of my head I would say the two biggest factors would be realistic, quality A.I. enemy forces, and open ended missions/ open maps. Then you need to have realistic movement and authentic weapon design as WK77 said. To be honest I'm 100% confident GB will turn out just as we hope; I'm only posting my thoughts for discussion's sake, not because I have any doubts about the developement.
  5. Tactial Gameplay - What is it?

    Exactly right. I didn't intend for the SEAL vs gamer reference to be a center of debate. I just tried to suggest a truely tactical combat game would allow such a group of players to play the game better than they could play R6 Vegas or any other BS tac shooter. It would allow them to actually apply their RW tactics, whether in PvP or co-op. And again, obviously we all have a mental picture of existing shooters as the battlefeild for my scenario, but it's important to visualize something like Arma, where run n gun is nonexistant, as is point and click at a 200 meter target with a sniper rifle. In a true sim, your typical twitch shooter is out of his element. Then there's the other definition of winning, which is being the player(s) who gets the most out of a session, win or lose. I have played GR co-op with people who utterly would destroy me one on one, every time, yet in co-op my level of immersion and desire to play as realistically as possible is what kept them alive through each mission, whether they knew it or not. They get 30 kills, but my 5 kills were all enemies who were targeting THEM without their knowledge. Most of your "skilled" gamers are looking for targets, not watching specific sectors. Yes they will outgun any enemy they happen to target, but they are of little use to the guy next to them, or should I say, the guy who SHOULD be next to them. But games cannot be played to the same level of tactical manner. (is that a propper sentence? Oh well, you know what I mean.) Even if they could be, it's usually done for the sake of it, and doesn't really get you any better results.
  6. Tactial Gameplay - What is it?

    Ick, you make some good points, but read my post again more carefully and literally. I did not say a realistic tac game would allow real operators to be unbeatable, I said it would allow them to use their knowledge to be better players, meaning better than they would be in a non-tactical game. And I didn't say they would never be beaten by uberleets, I said they would not get waisted by uberleets, in other words, they may be beaten occassionally, but not schooled (pwned). 1. Maybe you are not visualzing a truely realistic combat game/sim, and how could you? There hasn't been one yet, except maybe OFP and Arma (and the other expensive one). 2. You probably haven't really stopped and considered just how effective a group of real world trained players could be, and just how much they can bring to the table. Remember a more realistic sim puts leets more out of their element; things like not running and aiming, bullet travel time, etc. I have no tac shooter to give as an example, but your theory about uberleets dominating any sim they devote themselves to is proven wrong by Falcon 4. You MUST know combat tactics, maneuvering, proper communication, etc, just to survive a mission, let alone compete in any capacity against a real pilot. Anyhow, what matters to me most is co-op, and how immersive the co-op game will be for players who actually know real tactics, movement, etc. In reality I care nothing about "beating" an opposing squad of gamers. The only thing I care about is how deep the experience will be. I also want to be challenged to learn real tactics and reap the benefits of applying them. This type of thing should keep me playing for hours on end.
  7. Tactial Gameplay - What is it?

    Tac shooters quickly became what Guitar Hero and Rock Band are to simulating being a musician. An actual tactical combat game would allow those knowledgeable in real combat and tactics to use that knowledge to be better players, as apposed to having a real SEAL team play the game and get waisted by a squad of uberleets. For SP and co-op it's also crucial to have enemy A.I. that behave like humans and do not react with computer-type efficiency and accuracy, or real world tactics will get you nowhere, and as usual you end up having to use gamer skills, not combat tactics, to survive.. "Tactical" also goes hand in hand with realism for a satisfying, immersive experience. All we're being shoveled to date are short-lived adrenaline fixes labeld "tactical shooters". That really sums it up I think. The real world template has given way to the Hollywood template lately.
  8. Will we be able to play GB several hours in a row?

    The problem is the unrealistic pace at which people play these games, in order to be competative. The devs go to the trouble of creating realistic, immersive environments to facilitate as realistic an experience as possible, and what do we do? We ALWAYS end up playing the same old Quake Arena fast pace blastfest. If you moved like that in the real world it would be difficult and tiresome to spot targets also. I'm sure this won't be a popular reply, but too bad. The core of the problem is people not playing relative to the subject material, i.e. the game's concept. I'm not saying this is YOUR problem, I'm sayng it's where the problem stems from.
  9. Forget your taxreturn!

    there haven't been any lost nukes, lol. It's a massive fubar just to carry them on a flight not authorized for nukes, let alone crashing and losing one.
  10. Forget your taxreturn!

    It's remarkable to think of all the combat hours and training hours that aircraft has on it, just to crash on a 10 AM takeoff out of Guam. I once told a workmate on lunch break who was driving like a maniac "You know after all the crazy stunts I've lived through, I'll be really put out if I was killed in your POS car on a 3 block drive to McDonalds." The media doesn't know if there were nukes on board, lol. Whether there were or not, "there weren't", if you get my meaning.
  11. Would You Pay More

    Sure I would. In BFS' case I look at it as an investment, not just a purchace. Unlike with other games, I don't just want to pay the money I am required to pay for something I want. I have a desire to support this group. It's in my best interest that they profit and go on to develope an even better game next time, and frankly, I like to see people with integrity prosper. That's worth a few more of my $.
  12. Will the PC version support a game controller?

    If there's a 360 version, I would get it also, eventually, just for the big widescreen experience. And XBLive co-op. XBLive is begging for a grown-ups' tac shooter. One last request regarding the controller support: customizable mapping. (I know that's probably a nobrainer)
  13. The day my Xbox 360 died.

    It's made from the cheapest components from around the world, manufacturing is outsourced, probably to China and Mexico. Disgraceful pondscum, MS. I can't tell you how painfull it is for me to buy MS products, but basically, not buying MS products is like boycotting oil. What's your alternative? Besides the cheap parts and labor though, the 360 is generally just a **** machine. I can't remember anyone on my xblive friends list having a broken original xbox.
  14. Will the PC version support a game controller?

    It really does. That brings something up I would like to make a request for; if rumble ends up being encorporated, it would be utterly useless to me if it felt wrong when firing a weapon. The force feedback on the SP side of GRAW and GRAW2 console versions are absolutely horrendous. Three reasons: there is a slight delay between trigger pull and weapon discharge; there is WAY too much trigger action (trigger needs to be squeezed too far to fire weapon); and firing a weapon feels more like a slow "boing" instead of a sharp "POP". The MP side of the game feels much better, for anyone who wants to compare and see what I'm talking about. As far as explosions and other sensations, I have no need for the controller to react to anything but firing weapons, so I'm not concerned with how well they are depicted in force feedback. But it's crucial to get the weapon feel and trigger action right.
  15. Single player campaign realism, NORG

    What would really be ideal, with or without quicksaves, is if you have to replay a section, the A.I. who killed you may or may not be in the same location next time though