Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Swat 4 Demo what do you think of it ?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 6:20:23 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Just downloaded it played it alittle. Seems ok. I like the way you
yell at tem to drop weapons before killing them :) 

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 :( 


It seems to be ok but ive only played it on easy so far.

Any thoughts on the demo.

Thanks.

More about : swat demo

April 8, 2005 6:20:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 14:20:23 +1000, Digital Sheep <1@2> wrote:

>Any thoughts on the demo.

There have been several discussions of it. I would post my opinion
again, but as you think HL2 is the same as every other FPS, it isn't
worth it.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
April 8, 2005 6:20:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Digital Sheep" <1@2> wrote in message
news:ug1c51l8fh1m1pv3iva4in0c9j7n54aj0p@4ax.com...
>
> Just downloaded it played it alittle. Seems ok. I like the way you
> yell at tem to drop weapons before killing them :) 
>
> 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 :( 
>
>
> It seems to be ok but ive only played it on easy so far.
>
> Any thoughts on the demo.

I liked it, but it took me a bit to figure out that you had to restrain the
bystanders, even if you had to taser them to comply. This doesn't strike me
as typical SWAT procedure. Seems a little bit dangerous to handcuff
innocents and leave them where you found them when perps are still running
around. Was there a different way to win? That's almost a deal killer for
me since it really destroys the suspension of disbelief.

turk
--
"As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely,
the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great
and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire
at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H. L.
Mencken, in the Baltimore Sun, July 26, 1920.
Related resources
April 8, 2005 8:14:26 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 11:01:15 -0500, "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote:

>I liked it, but it took me a bit to figure out that you had to restrain the
>bystanders, even if you had to taser them to comply. This doesn't strike me
>as typical SWAT procedure. Seems a little bit dangerous to handcuff
>innocents and leave them where you found them when perps are still running
>around. Was there a different way to win? That's almost a deal killer for
>me since it really destroys the suspension of disbelief.

I believe it is standard to procedure to cuff everyone since in real
life a gunman could swap clothes with a hostage and you wouldn't know
who was good or bad. Whether or not they would be just left there is
another matter, but it doesn't bother me in the game.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
April 8, 2005 8:14:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:v7bd51pj0158i9at142krpackq64vs4i3d@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 11:01:15 -0500, "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>I liked it, but it took me a bit to figure out that you had to restrain
>>the
>>bystanders, even if you had to taser them to comply. This doesn't strike
>>me
>>as typical SWAT procedure. Seems a little bit dangerous to handcuff
>>innocents and leave them where you found them when perps are still running
>>around. Was there a different way to win? That's almost a deal killer
>>for
>>me since it really destroys the suspension of disbelief.
>
> I believe it is standard to procedure to cuff everyone since in real
> life a gunman could swap clothes with a hostage and you wouldn't know
> who was good or bad. Whether or not they would be just left there is
> another matter, but it doesn't bother me in the game.

Ok, I wasn't sure about that. But, IIRC you have a photo of the owner of
the auto repair shop before you go in and saving him is one of the mission
goals (which seems redundant since if any civilians die, you lose). Just
seems strange to me that you'd cuff them and leave rather than get them to
an exit.

turk
--
"As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely,
the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great
and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire
at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H. L.
Mencken, in the Baltimore Sun, July 26, 1920.
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 8:39:12 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

When's it on the shelves in Europe?
April 8, 2005 8:39:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 16:39:12 +0100, "One Punch Mickey"
<fantantiddlyspan@hotmail.com> wrote:

>When's it on the shelves in Europe?

The 28th I think, I have mine on preorder.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 8:45:15 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Y7idnaF7oNHKLcvfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
> "Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
> news:v7bd51pj0158i9at142krpackq64vs4i3d@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 11:01:15 -0500, "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>I liked it, but it took me a bit to figure out that you had to restrain
>>>the
>>>bystanders, even if you had to taser them to comply. This doesn't strike
>>>me
>>>as typical SWAT procedure. Seems a little bit dangerous to handcuff
>>>innocents and leave them where you found them when perps are still
>>>running
>>>around. Was there a different way to win? That's almost a deal killer
>>>for
>>>me since it really destroys the suspension of disbelief.
>>
>> I believe it is standard to procedure to cuff everyone since in real
>> life a gunman could swap clothes with a hostage and you wouldn't know
>> who was good or bad. Whether or not they would be just left there is
>> another matter, but it doesn't bother me in the game.
>
> Ok, I wasn't sure about that. But, IIRC you have a photo of the owner of
> the auto repair shop before you go in and saving him is one of the mission
> goals (which seems redundant since if any civilians die, you lose). Just
> seems strange to me that you'd cuff them and leave rather than get them to
> an exit.

Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? Besides, how do you know the owner isn't
in on it?

Furthermore, you don't want civilians going off half-cocked themselves.


Jonah Falcon
April 9, 2005 6:33:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:v5J5e.5830$44.1400@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:Y7idnaF7oNHKLcvfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
>> "Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
>> news:v7bd51pj0158i9at142krpackq64vs4i3d@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 11:01:15 -0500, "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I liked it, but it took me a bit to figure out that you had to restrain
>>>>the
>>>>bystanders, even if you had to taser them to comply. This doesn't
>>>>strike me
>>>>as typical SWAT procedure. Seems a little bit dangerous to handcuff
>>>>innocents and leave them where you found them when perps are still
>>>>running
>>>>around. Was there a different way to win? That's almost a deal killer
>>>>for
>>>>me since it really destroys the suspension of disbelief.
>>>
>>> I believe it is standard to procedure to cuff everyone since in real
>>> life a gunman could swap clothes with a hostage and you wouldn't know
>>> who was good or bad. Whether or not they would be just left there is
>>> another matter, but it doesn't bother me in the game.
>>
>> Ok, I wasn't sure about that. But, IIRC you have a photo of the owner of
>> the auto repair shop before you go in and saving him is one of the
>> mission goals (which seems redundant since if any civilians die, you
>> lose). Just seems strange to me that you'd cuff them and leave rather
>> than get them to an exit.
>
> Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? Besides, how do you know the owner isn't
> in on it?
>
> Furthermore, you don't want civilians going off half-cocked themselves.

Sorry, but no way they handcuff civilians and leave them there on the flloor
with perps with guns running around. That's like hand-serving them
hostages. As for "stockholm syndrome"...it's a robbery. That takes a
little longer to set in, Einstein.

turk
--
"As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely,
the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great
and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire
at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H. L.
Mencken, in the Baltimore Sun, July 26, 1920.
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 4:50:19 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:fqudncI9SqO9s8XfRVn-1Q@comcast.com...
> "Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:v5J5e.5830$44.1400@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>
>> "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:Y7idnaF7oNHKLcvfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
>>> "Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
>>> news:v7bd51pj0158i9at142krpackq64vs4i3d@4ax.com...
>>>> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 11:01:15 -0500, "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I liked it, but it took me a bit to figure out that you had to restrain
>>>>>the
>>>>>bystanders, even if you had to taser them to comply. This doesn't
>>>>>strike me
>>>>>as typical SWAT procedure. Seems a little bit dangerous to handcuff
>>>>>innocents and leave them where you found them when perps are still
>>>>>running
>>>>>around. Was there a different way to win? That's almost a deal killer
>>>>>for
>>>>>me since it really destroys the suspension of disbelief.
>>>>
>>>> I believe it is standard to procedure to cuff everyone since in real
>>>> life a gunman could swap clothes with a hostage and you wouldn't know
>>>> who was good or bad. Whether or not they would be just left there is
>>>> another matter, but it doesn't bother me in the game.
>>>
>>> Ok, I wasn't sure about that. But, IIRC you have a photo of the owner
>>> of the auto repair shop before you go in and saving him is one of the
>>> mission goals (which seems redundant since if any civilians die, you
>>> lose). Just seems strange to me that you'd cuff them and leave rather
>>> than get them to an exit.
>>
>> Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? Besides, how do you know the owner
>> isn't in on it?
>>
>> Furthermore, you don't want civilians going off half-cocked themselves.
>
> Sorry, but no way they handcuff civilians and leave them there on the
> flloor with perps with guns running around.

Um, there are cleaners that follow the SWAT teams and take them out of the
situation.

Jonah Falcon
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 7:22:04 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

It is always better to type to reply than to link to a picture that
conveys the same message.
Anyway, my curiosity has lead me to clcik on the link...(Thought it was
some cool photos, disappointed!)

Jonah Falcon wrote:

> www.jonahfalcon.com/alwaysbetter.jpg
April 10, 2005 3:58:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:fL_5e.6431$44.6287@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:fqudncI9SqO9s8XfRVn-1Q@comcast.com...
>> "Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:v5J5e.5830$44.1400@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>> "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:Y7idnaF7oNHKLcvfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
>>>> "Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
>>>> news:v7bd51pj0158i9at142krpackq64vs4i3d@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 11:01:15 -0500, "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I liked it, but it took me a bit to figure out that you had to
>>>>>>restrain the
>>>>>>bystanders, even if you had to taser them to comply. This doesn't
>>>>>>strike me
>>>>>>as typical SWAT procedure. Seems a little bit dangerous to handcuff
>>>>>>innocents and leave them where you found them when perps are still
>>>>>>running
>>>>>>around. Was there a different way to win? That's almost a deal
>>>>>>killer for
>>>>>>me since it really destroys the suspension of disbelief.
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe it is standard to procedure to cuff everyone since in real
>>>>> life a gunman could swap clothes with a hostage and you wouldn't know
>>>>> who was good or bad. Whether or not they would be just left there is
>>>>> another matter, but it doesn't bother me in the game.
>>>>
>>>> Ok, I wasn't sure about that. But, IIRC you have a photo of the owner
>>>> of the auto repair shop before you go in and saving him is one of the
>>>> mission goals (which seems redundant since if any civilians die, you
>>>> lose). Just seems strange to me that you'd cuff them and leave rather
>>>> than get them to an exit.
>>>
>>> Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? Besides, how do you know the owner
>>> isn't in on it?
>>>
>>> Furthermore, you don't want civilians going off half-cocked themselves.
>>
>> Sorry, but no way they handcuff civilians and leave them there on the
>> flloor with perps with guns running around.
>
> Um, there are cleaners that follow the SWAT teams and take them out of the
> situation.

Um, I circled around the same auto repair shop numerous times looking for
that last perp and those people were in the same place I left them and I
never saw a "sweeper", even though I reported the civilian. Have you tried
the demo or are you just trying to be a bothersome pain in the ass again?

turk
--
"As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely,
the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great
and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire
at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H. L.
Mencken, in the Baltimore Sun, July 26, 1920.
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 9:12:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 11:58:40 -0500, "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote:

>"Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:fL_5e.6431$44.6287@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>
>> "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:fqudncI9SqO9s8XfRVn-1Q@comcast.com...
>>> "Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>> news:v5J5e.5830$44.1400@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>>>
>>>> Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? Besides, how do you know the owner
>>>> isn't in on it?
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore, you don't want civilians going off half-cocked themselves.
>>>
>>> Sorry, but no way they handcuff civilians and leave them there on the
>>> flloor with perps with guns running around.
>>
>> Um, there are cleaners that follow the SWAT teams and take them out of the
>> situation.
>
>Um, I circled around the same auto repair shop numerous times looking for
>that last perp and those people were in the same place I left them and I
>never saw a "sweeper", even though I reported the civilian.

Game mechanics are different than reality mechanics. In a way, he's
lamnating on some unrealistic aspect of the game.

>Have you tried
>the demo or are you just trying to be a bothersome pain in the ass again?
>
>turk
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 9:33:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

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.)
April 10, 2005 9:50:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Raymond Martineau" <bk039@ncf.ca> wrote in message
news:ek5j51dqq813n4q2jeo0mm64ojlcj5vuft@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 11:58:40 -0500, "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>"Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:fL_5e.6431$44.6287@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>> "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:fqudncI9SqO9s8XfRVn-1Q@comcast.com...
>>>> "Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:v5J5e.5830$44.1400@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? Besides, how do you know the owner
>>>>> isn't in on it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Furthermore, you don't want civilians going off half-cocked
>>>>> themselves.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, but no way they handcuff civilians and leave them there on the
>>>> flloor with perps with guns running around.
>>>
>>> Um, there are cleaners that follow the SWAT teams and take them out of
>>> the
>>> situation.
>>
>>Um, I circled around the same auto repair shop numerous times looking for
>>that last perp and those people were in the same place I left them and I
>>never saw a "sweeper", even though I reported the civilian.
>
> Game mechanics are different than reality mechanics. In a way, he's
> lamnating on some unrealistic aspect of the game.

What the hell does that mean? My criticism IS that it isn't realistic. I
expect more out of my games now. It's just stupid to handcuff civilians and
leave them in order to go look for armed suspects. The only thing that
might make it easier for them to take hostages might be if I wrapped them
with a big red ribbon.

turk
--
"As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely,
the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great
and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire
at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H. L.
Mencken, in the Baltimore Sun, July 26, 1920.
April 11, 2005 10:15:48 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 17:33:37 -0400, bk039@ncf.ca (Raymond Martineau)
wrote:

<snip loads of opinions nearly all of which I don't agree with>

>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.

Maybe it is short in terms of the number of levels, but it more than
makes up for that in terms of replayability due to random NPC
placement and the mission editor. I have played the demo loads of
times and got far more enjoyment out of than quite a few full games I
have bought.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 11:53:16 AM

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.)
>
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 11:53:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 07:53:16 +1000, Digital Sheep <1@2> wrote:

>
>
>
>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 :( 

There's a hiding spot in the garage behind the wire fence enclosing a large
number of tires. This is located in the northwest position. (14? Can't
remember the numbering...)

While not a hiding spot, you could take a look at the roof in case enemies
try doubling back on you.

Other then these two points, I haven't found any other enemies trying to
hide from detection.
!