GRAW PC delay explained

By Ellie Gibson Published 7 March, 2006

By Mr Producer himself.

Following the announcement that the PC version of Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter has been delayed, producer Mathieu Girard has gone on record to explain why.

In short: "To achieve better quality and deliver all the features we wanted to have in the game," according to Girard.

"GRAW PC is a project developed specifically for this machine so its development cycle was different from that of the other platforms."

So what will be different, exactly? Well, the gameplay, for starters. "For instance the ghosts are controlled in a way that is specific to the PC, with a much more accurate order system," Girard said.

"This involves adapting all the game content (including reprogramming completely the enemy AI) and tuning it to this way of playing."

The storyline and setting will be the same as in the Xbox 360 version, Girard went on, "But all the rest had to be reworked, to appeal to a GR1 audience while at the same time taking into account the new PC specific features.

"The other major differences are, of course, full first-person control, and PC-specific multiplayer modes."

Girard described his team's multiplayer plans as "very ambitious" - but don't worry, it's all coming together.

"Things such as simulating a fully interactive physical environment over the network were risky, but we are now comforted that the co-operative mode will deliver unprecedented experience of multiplayer gameplay.

"The domination mode is also very promising as it changes the control of areas to something more interesting than simply capturing flags." That's all he's saying for now, but we're promised more details soon.

The PC version of Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter is now down for a May release. The Xbox 360 game will be first to arrive on March 10th, followed by the Xbox release a week later and the PS2 version on March 31st.

Picture of Ellie.

About Ellie Gibson

Since joining Eurogamer in the mid 2000s, Ellie has written about subjects as diverse as the fall of Gizmondo, the rise of Hollyoaks actresses in Red Alert games and the noise a bear makes under NSFW circumstances.

Read more articles from Ellie by visiting the Ellie Gibson archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (33) Latest comment 6 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • El_MUERkO #1 6 years ago

    he said "But all the rest had to be reworked, to appeal to a GR1 audience" which could be a very good thing

    /crosses fingers

  • alimokrane #2 6 years ago

    @El_MUERkO: Exactly, fingers crossed. I hope he's not just saying this to fool us although seeing how the 360 version is looking I do have high exepctations
    Edited by alimokrane at 07/03/06 @ 11:27

  • dbeamish #3 6 years ago

    Domination Mode?

    LOL visions of strap-ons and leather are for some reason filling my brain.

  • PearOfAnguish #4 6 years ago

    Better than the console version, then.

  • Hicksy #5 6 years ago

    Quite possibly o_O

    I was seduced by the 360 v. £35 special offer deal from Powerplay tho

    Can't be bad :D

  • Talha #6 6 years ago

    Most likely, they are working on a new version of StarForce to torment the hapless PC buyers with.

    Go ahead people, don't wait buy an X360 and get the game on it (I think multiple view function ONLY functions on X360 anyway) - make their PC versions flop. That will be justice!!!

  • Mashum #7 6 years ago

    > "The other major differences are, of course, full first-person control"

    Does that mean the 360 doesn't get full 1st person controls? I demand full 1st person control! :-<

    I hope they mean it when they say "appeal to a GR1 audience" there is still no other game quite like it.

  • Furbs #8 6 years ago

    No the 360 version has FPS and over the shoulder. Not really sure what they mean about full first person control though, unless its to do with working the strategy parts in to the game via the hud rather than a map.

    Nice (sorry, crap) attempt at a troll there PearofAnguish.

    Different != better.

  • smoison #9 6 years ago

    "make their PC versions flop. That will be justice!!!"

    You want the best version to flop?

    Unfortunetly, those of us who want realistic aiming WITHOUT AutoAiming will have to wait for the PC version.

    And its seems it will be the better version by far.

  • Furbs #10 6 years ago

    Theres no autoaim in GRAW 360...

  • Mashum #11 6 years ago

    @smoison

    I know the interface was a bit amateurish but the original xbox version of GR1 was just as much fun as the PC version, I had auto-aim off on both versions.

    The quality of the xbox (and360) controller thumb sticks is really good so with a bit of practice and you too can turn off auto aiming ;)

    edit: can you even turn on auto-aiming on the PC, probably not.. I don't remember it was a while ago!
    Edited by Mashum at 07/03/06 @ 12:07

  • alimokrane #12 6 years ago

    @Talha: The starforce protection crap pissed the hell out of me in Prince of Persia The Two Thrones ... not sure should I get the 360 or wait for PC ? each version has its own benefits hard to choose ...

  • Talha #13 6 years ago

    @smoison : Well I only meant that since that 'best' version is being designed to f**ck up my PC, just to 'protect' the sales of perhaps the least-selling version (compared to the console versions), it better flop.

    And I agree with the other comments here - you might prefer keyboard and mouse setup but other than that, there is little to separate the two versions. And yes, nobody FORCES you to use autoaiming.

    @alimokrane : There are no two ways about it - GET THE 360 VERSION. It will come out earlier, perhaps have a better, more consistent framerate, sport an exclusive multiple-view option, and WILL PLAY HAPPILY without requiring you to perform emergency surgery on your PC everytime you want to play.
    Edited by Talha at 07/03/06 @ 12:12

  • Furbs #14 6 years ago

    smoison, by the way, have you got your Aegia physics card? Because you'll need some serious hardware to run this to 360 graphical levels without one.

    Oh and if you want realism, why is it in the PC version the guy is seemingly running around with the rifle on his shoulder, Predator-style? In reality if he's running around the rifle would be at his hip or across his chest unless he was using say an ACOG sight. Swings and roundabouts.

    I hope in the PC version they bring back a 2 squad system. Would make it considerably different since it gives more scope for tactics.
    Edited by Furbs at 07/03/06 @ 12:17

  • Hunam85 #15 6 years ago

    delay delay delay cancell, remind anyone else of GR2?

  • Talha #16 6 years ago

    @Furbs: Does this game require the physics card? Don't tell me...

    Good bye PC gaming - it was NOT nice while it lasted.

  • Furbs #17 6 years ago

    No it doesnt require one Talha (although the cynic in me thinks thats one of the reasons for the delay - until these card come to market), but to run it at 360 resolutions, with the multicore stuff like the crosscom is going to tax even the highest spec system without the Aegia taking some of the strain.

  • Talha #18 6 years ago

    @Furbs : IN other words, you won't get the optimal experience without it. Same thing - one cannot play in peace knowing someone else is getting a better gameplay experience, especially if one is a PC gamer.

    So now we have sound cards, graphics cards and physics cards - next we will have cards to make NPC legs move realistically (without which legs will glide), cards to boot up a game at all (without which the PC won't boot if the disc is within 10 feet), cards for advanced AI (without which all in-game people will be lemmings), cards to disable StarForce protection to play the game.....

    PC gaming =stinking rip off for the elite few.
    Edited by Talha at 07/03/06 @ 12:37

  • Mashum #19 6 years ago

    The 2 squads was what made the single player missions of GR1 so much fun, moving one into position under the cover of the other squad then moving the second under the cover of the first - very tense and exciting.

    Regardless of platform GRAW will probably look like Serious Sam in comparison to GR1.

    If people have the cash and want to spend it on PC gaming why not let them - it's their generous contributions to ATI and Nvidia's R&D budgets that help come up with the technology that drives every console and PC.

  • Talha #20 6 years ago

    "If people have the cash and want to spend it on PC gaming why not let them - it's their generous contributions to ATI and Nvidia's R&D budgets that help come up with the technology that drives every console and PC. "

    The thing is, during the past few years demands on the average salaried gamer has increased exponentially. Those companies were innovating just fine even before they started tagging every product with a $600 price tag - it is OUR gullibility that have encouraged ATI and NVidia to rip us even more. These same companies are happy to sell their high-end GPUs to MS and Sony for peanuts. To add insult to injury, NVidia drivers STILL suck and create more problems than they solve. And they are not even stopping at one GPU per PC - where will it stop and where will it lead the average Joe like me who has to maintain a household? Given that PCs are the most ubiquitous platform (far so in comparison with consoles), I think the whole GPU pricing model can be easily revised downward since that will deliver more sales to both NVidia and ATI, instead of reaping massive profits from a high-end that only covers about 2% of the total sales.
    Edited by Talha at 07/03/06 @ 12:55

  • Mashum #21 6 years ago

    As someone who spent a big chunk of wages on building a top notch PC 15 months ago that no longer plays everything on high detail I know just what you mean.

    Bleeding edge technology always has been expensive and the early adopters pay 2x more than everyone else to beem with pride at their water cooled fish tank PCs, you might call that gullable and I'm as bad as anyone.

    Sony and M$ get it cheap because they buy in bulk, a large portion of the price is the R&D not the manufacturing cost per chip so there is a big economy of scale.

    It's much cheaper to buy the next to latest generation of gfx card. It's even cheaper again in the long run to buy a 360 - go on! Settle into a nice relaxing 4 year plus upgrade cycle.

    EDIT: that is assuming you have not already bought a 360...
    Edited by Mashum at 07/03/06 @ 13:35

  • reality_cheque #22 6 years ago

    To add insult to injury, NVidia drivers STILL suck and create more problems than they solve

    Tell me about it, my nvidia card still refuses to admit that it works with windows xp, even though we've had it installed fine in two other machines.

    This is why I'm now back to using my previous card and a desktop fan cooling it down to cope with guild wars :(

  • karstux #23 6 years ago

    Talha - what you're writing just isn't true. Nowadays, you can put together a fairly powerful gaming PC for a reasonable amount of money, all you have to do is not buy the most cutting edge stuff. I.e., get an Athlon 64 3500+ instead of an X2 4800+. Get a GF6600XT instead of an 7800GTX. The box will still run today's (and tomorrow's) games and look good doing so. I don't think you'll ever have to buy a physics processor card, before long they'll either silently die or become integrated into the graphics cards.

    No one's forced to starve just because they're a PC gamer. I wonder, where does your apparent hatred of PC gaming come from?

    (I'll agree that the current copy protection mania sucks, though.)

    As for the article, I'm really happy to see that the studio regard the PC version as more than just a by-product of the console version. My anticipation for the game just went up by a couple of notches. They'll even give us network coop play, who'da thunk it! :-)

  • smoison #24 6 years ago

    Lol @ eveyone who thinks Nvidia and Ati rip us off!

    The best technology has always been very expensive, I don't where you were for the last 20 years, but PC gameing is the ONLY WAY to get the best graphics AND best interface (mouse, gamepad, steering wheel, joystick, etc)

    You can think PC gamers are gettign ripped of, but WE are the ones who pay 30 bucks for a new games (Toca3) NOT 70 because its NeXt Gen. We get free online play, and free updates.
    A hardcore gamer will always be a PC gamer, because in the end , all the games you play, were made by people who play on PC.

  • Furbs #25 6 years ago

    Whats a "hardcore" gamer smoison?

  • UncleLou #26 6 years ago

    Wow, Talha, you're really a bit special, aren't you. I diagnose a serious case of post-purchase anxiety.

  • Talha #27 6 years ago

    @Reality: Thanks for the sympathy - you know my pain

    @UncleLou: Its not exactly post-purchase - I have my system for several months now and it still is running fine. But I fear about the future.

    @karstux: My hatred comes from the financial burden I foresee. I currently have a P4 with I GB RAM, and a 6800GT. WHile it is running all of today's games quite well, I am worried that the way things are going, in, say a six months from now, my system will be outdated and bringing it up to scratch will cost an arm and a leg. And yes, then you have your copy protection rackets. How long do you think, will it take games to come out which ONLY run well on an SLI/CrossFire setup? I am all for innovation and obviously it comes from the PC platform - but I am not sure for how long I can keep footing the astronomical bill. Perhaps it is hard to understand for someone who always have enough disposable cash to buy the latest hardware, but that's not me.

    @Mashum: What you suggested is exactly what I did - I bought a 6800Gt right at the time the 7800GTX came out. Regardless of everything else and even the horrible driver issues, I think it provided excellent value for money.

    @Smoison: Suffice it to say that I have a decent PC as well as a PS2, and when I am playing games on both I no longer remember the platform. Also, it is not just hardware but HOW WELL the hardware is utilized. I know there are inherent limitations on optimization of the PC, but we the users get screwed just the same. When I am playing GT4 on an antiquated machine with 32 MB of RAM, at 60 frames per second, with a steering wheel with divine force feedback, I somehow feel I won't ever get the same experience on PC no matter what the configuration, because even a 7800GTX won't be fully utilized before it is replaced by an 8800 GTX Ultra. If the price of that is not being considered a hardcore gamer, so be it.
    Edited by Talha at 08/03/06 @ 05:14

  • smoison #28 6 years ago

    I see what you mean but you can't be angy because you can't have EVERY game at the best graphics possible.
    The whole beuty of the PC is the hardware AND software are ALWAYS evolving, which means with your rig, you'll always have XBOX 360 graphics.

    Yet, if you WANT you will be able to up increase yout RAM to decrease loading time.
    Or if you want NEXT Gen graphics (Ps4) you can get a next gen graphics card.
    Or if you want to be able to download with emule, while playing your favorite game, get a DualCore CPU...

    PC's are CHOICE, and if you don't want that choice, of course you will want a consol.
    But to some people out there, no choice SUCKS.
    Edited by smoison at 08/03/06 @ 09:00

  • Talha #29 6 years ago

    @smoison : Choice and expandibility are precisely the two reasons I love the PC platform. What my rant was about was this sudden prospect of EXPONENTIAL increase in cost of PC gaming with the advent of multi-core processors and quad-SLI configurations. Just think: if I WANT a single 7800 GTX I can hand over $500 and get it - but suddenly to enjoy top-end PC gaming I have to shell out for two cards, not to mention the requisite chipset, a new power supply.... thereby multiplying the cost by 3. Then, if I want to upgrade that (no doubt I will have to within a year or two), those upgrades will also cost me THRICE the money. And all the while I know the hardware I have is not being pushed to the limit. Is that fair?

    I am a PC gamer and it is not the platform that sucks - it is the financial and emotional toll that sucks. It makes you question whether all the extra effort and money is worth it, just for a few thousand more pixels and other eye candy. Because essentially, these days that is the only difference between most PC and console games. Yes, PC is now a CHOICE - remember when it used to be the DEFAULT CHOICE for gaming?
    Edited by Talha at 08/03/06 @ 09:13

  • smoison #30 6 years ago

    Faire enough,

    Price rant is all alowed :D

    Don't forget to put a couple hundred $$$ a side to buy Vista (AS IF!)

  • Talha #31 6 years ago

    @Smoison: Glad you finally got what I was trying to say. By the way, why the less than positive feelings for Vista? It comes with Direct X 10 after all and looks promising!

  • smoison #32 6 years ago

    Except it wont be very backwars compatible (With DirectX 9 or less), and will need soo much resouces, it will force you to upgrade if you want your games to run as smoothly.

    500 Mb of RAM just for Winodws is a bit steep.

  • Talha #33 6 years ago

    @Smoison: True, but I have learned that Vista will be compatible with BOTH DX9 and 10. Also, I have heard that you need 256 MB for Vista and not 512, but you DO need a 128 MB card to run Aero Glass. In fact, I think that keeping in mind requirements for XP (which will celebrate its fifth anniversay in June, incredibly), the reqs for Vista, while steep, still appear reasonable. All in all, I think once Vista ships and DX10 enabled cards start appearing, THAT will be an ideal time to upgrade.