New! | Forums

[StealthTallyFox]

heh, even GRFS makes all my CoD-playing friends cry about how hard it is, and that's the end of their GR career

[Ghost Sniper33]

heh, even GRFS makes all my CoD-playing friends cry about how hard it is, and that's the end of their GR career

That is really sad..... Even with all the perk wanna be crap they struggled? I would love to see them play a real GR game

[jeannaq]

Let me tell you how no PVP would lead ghost recon to it's downfall. Again I am hoping ghost recon does have pvp. Doesn't have to be open real pvp but 6v6 or 8v8 is good. If ghost recon wildlands do not have pvp it can lose a lot of consumers. For one thing as far as we know ghost recon wildlands announce co-op. Meaning you can play up to 4 players co-op. So you being included you can only chat with 3 other people to play with. As for as us shooters go I like to talk to at least 5+ or 6+ teammates in a shooting game and 12+ people in a lobby. It is better for the communicate to have more communication going on at once. You can't really communicate with AI. Secondly, not everyone enjoys co-op after beating the game once. How many times did anyone play a shooting game campaign more than once or shall I say beat it more than once without any go back issues like data was erased or assisting a friend? Co-op only can cause a game to die quick due to repetition no matter how many times they allow us to take on missions in different ways. Good example is Batman. A game that's story mode only and so many people was hype for the game and within a month you didn't hear about it anymore. The only way to start talking about it again is by making a sequel. AI has it's limits for PVE but humans for PVP has different experience and grows stronger when playing the game. The game will be insufficient if it lack PVP. Besides what shooting games has good reviews on story/campaign? As far as I know reviewers favor online PVP. This would be another rainbow Six Siege disappointment if it lacks PVP or PVE. Minus well call it Just Cause 3 "2.0". Both need to stay and I hope Ubisoft use these 4 years to consider this

The same can be said in reverse. Not everyone wants PvP. Too often do we see shooter games focus on the MP and completely ignore the SP and just paste a rehash of previous games. You are right though, most reviewers knock games that don't have the COD/Battlefield PvP aspect. In many ways those games are a poison and has formed a lot of bias in gaming now. It is truly sad when a shooter can't be successful now because it doesn't have lame PvP in it.

[StealthTallyFox]

That is really sad..... Even with all the perk wanna be crap they struggled? I would love to see them play a real GR game

oh, no need, they can't even pass "Nimble Guardian" mission in GRFS, they'd be in a coffin as soon as they play GRAW, hell, they don't even dare to touch GRWildlands when it launches

[Ghost Sniper33]

oh, no need, they can't even pass "Nimble Guardian" mission in GRFS, they'd be in a coffin as soon as they play GRAW, hell, they don't even dare to touch GRWildlands when it launches

And sadly they will be the ones that UBI is probally targeting - not the core gamers from the series that have been alianated

[StealthTallyFox]

And sadly they will be the ones that UBI is probally targeting - not the core gamers from the series that have been alianated

well, I can say with 100% confidence that these guys don't even try playing their best, they don't even know in CoDAW you can shoot the targets in the firing range without using the slow mo until I did that first try, soo... Ubi is doing useless effort to get them here cuz they'll stick to their ACR and aim assists(noobs)

[Cortexian]

And sadly they will be the ones that UBI is probally targeting - not the core gamers from the series that have been alianated

Nah, GRW is going back to it's Ghost Recon roots more than other newer GR games.

That said, it's not gonna be "Island Thunder 2.0" with upgraded graphics and all original mechanics. They're doing something new. I think too many "core gamers" get upset when a new game in a franchise comes out and the developers try something new and different from what they're used to. They're not abandoning you, they're just trying different things.

[lxl H A T E lxl]

The same can be said in reverse. Not everyone wants PvP. Too often do we see shooter games focus on the MP and completely ignore the SP and just paste a rehash of previous games. You are right though, most reviewers knock games that don't have the COD/Battlefield PvP aspect. In many ways those games are a poison and has formed a lot of bias in gaming now. It is truly sad when a shooter can't be successful now because it doesn't have lame PvP in it.

you call PvP lame, but i say it's what keeps a game interesting if it's well done. In single player, eventually you become limited. There are only so many ways you can complete a mission. With PvP you get a different experience pretty much every game because of the human element. That's why i can go back on a game like GRFS after 3 years or even COD 4 after 7+ years and still have a new experience as if i was playing it for the first time

[Flaw3dGenius23]

Nah, GRW is going back to it's Ghost Recon roots more than other newer GR games.

That said, it's not gonna be "Island Thunder 2.0" with upgraded graphics and all original mechanics. They're doing something new. I think too many "core gamers" get upset when a new game in a franchise comes out and the developers try something new and different from what they're used to. They're not abandoning you, they're just trying different things.

Lets hope so...

Again lets hope so...as it was after Island Thunder Ghost Recon came into it's own and WAS the best shooter on consoles!

Also the problem is not trying something new the problem is copying the run and gun COD or Battlefield, Ubisoft games were not about that but that's what they aspired to be the last releases bar Siege although lets face it they have tried to appeal to the COD crowd as much as they could.

[jeannaq]

you call PvP lame, but i say it's what keeps a game interesting if it's well done. In single player, eventually you become limited. There are only so many ways you can complete a mission. With PvP you get a different experience pretty much every game because of the human element. That's why i can go back on a game like GRFS after 3 years or even COD 4 after 7+ years and still have a new experience as if i was playing it for the first time

For me it is quite the opposite. If a single player side is done well with good mechanics, story telling, dialogue I want to go back to it over and over. Where as it's PvP that gets incredibly boring. You play for 20 minutes then you are just replaying that same 20 minutes over and over until you get maybe a better gun after hours of ungodly grinding. Plus with a good single player, you can go back and play it 10, 20 maybe even 30 years from now if you kept the hardware in good shape, where as all these always connected and MP only games are useless data or paper weights.