Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (
More info?)
I tried the demo but can't finish it ? Seems to me i went everywherei
could yet mission never ends ?
Must be a Terro somewhere. Where i don't know
On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 17:33:37 -0400, bk039@ncf.ca (Raymond Martineau)
wrote:
>On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 14:20:23 +1000, Digital Sheep <1@2> wrote:
>
>>
>>Just downloaded it played it alittle. Seems ok. I like the way you
>>yell at tem to drop weapons before killing them
>
>I wasn't entirely impressed with the demo. I have a few pages of comments,
>which should be more than enough for people wanting to play the game, but
>could easily be considered over-analysing the demo (as if that's bad.)
>
>My first impressions:
>- You can't click through the license agreement unless you scroll to the
>bottom. In that case, you can click through after reading those ~1500
>words within 2.5 seconds.
>- The EULA Flesch Reading Ease is 25.3, and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level is
>12.0 - which merely confirms that it is hard to read. (Checked by MS-Word -
>there's more than enough time to review a simple demo.)
>- ALT-TAB is not "supported". (An issue, since Microsoft says that
>applications should allow ALT-TABbing on a multi-tasking system, even if it
>isn't used by most people.)
>- It writes to the same directory it's installed in - thus resulting in the
>inability to have multiple player profiles on one installation.
>
>Onto the gameplay:
>- The game could use a tutorial that described the basics for the first
>minute into the mission, for those who played FPS games but not SWAT in
>particular - describe how to pick the lock to the roof (point at door and
>hold fire, or use right-click menu), how to yell at enemies ('F'), and to
>split your team (e.g. red follow you and blue covering the staircase to
>prevent those sneaking up from behind - 'TAB' and right click) Such a
>tutorial isn't too hard to write - it should at most be three short
>paragraphs (or in this case, one sentence.)
>- The teammates don't seem to be capable of completing the mission by
>themselves - they need your guidance (which also explains why the mission
>is failed if you get taken out.) They also have a habit of breaking
>formation when they encounter an enemy.
>- Some criminals seem to be highly resistant to non-leathal weapons. I'm
>not much of an expert in firearms, but I expect that the suspects should be
>knocked out a bit more easily - even if they might be stronger willed.
>- The enemy and squadmates combat AI seems appropriate during combat -
>enemies run, take cover and seem to know basic tactics. However, they
>aren't the best at detecting threats or hearing noises as they don't appear
>alert to gunfire elsewhere in the building.
>- The difficulty scale seems to be on the easy side - some people might
>find it a challenge to score 95+, but veterens might not find such scores
>to be much of a trophy. (My last attempt scored 99 on Hard - missing point
>was from failing to collect the last weapon.)
>
>Misc comments:
>- BUG: If you order your squad to open a blocked door, they will get stuck
>in an infinite loop where they keep attempting to open the door. (This
>doesn't happen with locked doors.) There are ways to break them out, but
>it seems to take a little bit of work.
>- You can't seem to restrain targets when they are in a semi-dazed state
>(e.g. just been tazered). This seems to create a partial suspension of
>belief.
>- In some mission sessions, you will need to do a bit of hunting to find
>the last guy. (There are ways to preven the need for hunting caused by
>enemies circling around, but this is a special case.
>- Under the official timeline, it's just begging to be a timed mission with
>15 minutes on the clock (tactical action starts at 15:45, criminals
>threaten to kill hostages at 16:00). There are timers in at least one of
>the 11 missions in the full game, but this doesn't seem to be one of them.
>- The enemy and civilian placement is entirely randomized, which is a good
>thing.
>- There don't appear to be any saved games aside from campaign progression.
>Not a problem, since missions shouldn't take too long to complete (aside
>from a long search period). Besides, saving and reloading in this kind of
>game is cheesy.
>- This game will most likely receive an 'M' from the ESRB, based on blood
>and profanity. As for me, I would not consider this game suitable for
>young players because of strong profanity (and as I learned from below,
>probably also because one of the missions contains some porn stuff.)
>- Full version contents can be determined from the .INI files. (e.g.
>Conversations.ini and ObjectiveSpecs.ini and SwatMissions.ini give
>information about the eleven missions, SwatEquipment.ini describes items in
>the full game ) They might as well released the demo seriously on April
>1st, while modifing the .INI files so that people like me would feed an
>incorrect storyline to other users - which would be a perfect AFJ.
>
>Overall, it might be a good game, but the demo doesn't encourage my
>purchase, as it indicates the game might be a little too short. I might be
>expecting a little too much from the game, but after seeing games progress
>through the years, my standards are a little higher.
>
>>I liked Raven SHield and play it online. If Swat 4 had 8 player Coop i
>>would buy it but its only got 4 players
>
>Raven Shield to SWAT shouldn't be a difficult transition - instead of
>pressing the trigger, you just have to shout out as soon as you see
>something move. If they try attacking or fleeing, you can safely shoot
>them once with the shotgun/tazer without penalty (although there might be
>something for excessive force if you do it too much.)
>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram