What happened to Wildlands? | Forums

[sarbazevije]

I'd like to thank the mods for graciously locking my thread to stop us from having any critical discussion!!

Also, Ulukai... you guys did it with 4 other guys and it is not that we don't trust you, as stated before... we don't trust UBI so cut us some slack.

What we are wondering is... why so many trailers of Co-Op and ZERO trailers or even a few seconds of gameplay on the actual Campaign?

Don't get your hopes up my friend. Remember what happened with R6 and Division? Mods on here keep reassuring me the game absolutely HAS a single player campaign. I don't believe it for a second though.

[DanHibikiFanXM]

I've said this in the past, but I'm on board with you guys. Ubisoft really needs to show how hardcore and tactical the game can be if for no other reason than to put everyone at ease. I've seen the trailers, I was at E3, I was at the Ubisoft Lounge - I can see the potential that the game has even though the E3 demo was designed for casuals and guided to ensure playtimes were short to keep the lines moving. It's just annoying to see people continuously pointing at the E3 footage and saying "Ah-ha! See? Another Ubisoft trick! I knew this game would be terrible!" without acknowledging the fact the demo was a victim of the E3 setting more than anything else.

A lot of this IS on Ubisoft though. They are clearly aware of the negative reaction the E3 gameplay had for older fans of the franchise that have been trained to expect the worst from the company. They haven't responded, and that reflects really poorly upon them. That tells me that they either don't care, or they are so rigidly adhering to a marketing strategy that are unwilling to adjust. IMO they have to show more authentic and representative gameplay. Don't tell us that it's tactical, show us.

[Dcopymope]

I've said this in the past, but I'm on board with you guys. Ubisoft really needs to show how hardcore and tactical the game can be if for no other reason than to put everyone at ease. I've seen the trailers, I was at E3, I was at the Ubisoft Lounge - I can see the potential that the game has even though the E3 demo was designed for casuals and guided to ensure playtimes were short to keep the lines moving. It's just annoying to see people continuously pointing at the E3 footage and saying "Ah-ha! See? Another Ubisoft trick! I knew this game would be terrible!" without acknowledging the fact the demo was a victim of the E3 setting more than anything else.

A lot of this IS on Ubisoft though. They are clearly aware of the negative reaction the E3 gameplay had for older fans of the franchise that have been trained to expect the worst from the company. They haven't responded, and that reflects really poorly upon them. That tells me that they either don't care, or they are so rigidly adhering to a marketing strategy that are unwilling to adjust. IMO they have to show more authentic and representative gameplay. Don't tell us that it's tactical, show us.

Its most likely both cases that are the reason as you state in the bolded text. As was the case with previous Tom Clancy games. They'll show some so called gameplay footage, and then you won't hear or see anything new about the game for almost years on end, as was the case with R6: Siege, which is a shell of what Rainbow Six used to be about. No response to questions and concerns fans may have, just dead silence. And then we get the game at release, and it ends up being everything hardcore fans never asked for. So the dead silence is not looking good for them thus far. I'm sure most hardcore fans could give a rats butt cheeks about changing a characters wardrobe just for the sake of looking cool. We want something much more than that for sixty bucks. I haven't bought a "Tom Clancy" game in years, but I'm trying to give these people a chance to impress me with this game, but so far, all I've seen is The Division's arcadish gameplay under another name, NOT Ghost Recon, and I never understood the appeal The Division had with hardcore gamer's. If there is a Beta, play it. If you don't like it. then drop the product and spend your money else where. At the Beta stage, what you see is always what you are going to get minus the bugs.

[SuperBiscotCOT]

Just to clear the point of the subject, the main request is : "show us ASAP how tactical and hardcore the game can be ?"
And I'm tottaly with you guys

Also don't forget that there was a GRW non-playable demo at E3 and from what we heard, of people who saw it, it showed night-stealth-tactical mission. So maybe we can expect to see this demo reavealed to all soon

[Sp--pyBrown]

I just wanna say that I agree with y'all for this once. Lol.

[GiveMeTactical]

I've said this in the past, but I'm on board with you guys. Ubisoft really needs to show how hardcore and tactical the game can be if for no other reason than to put everyone at ease. I've seen the trailers, I was at E3, I was at the Ubisoft Lounge - I can see the potential that the game has even though the E3 demo was designed for casuals and guided to ensure playtimes were short to keep the lines moving. It's just annoying to see people continuously pointing at the E3 footage and saying "Ah-ha! See? Another Ubisoft trick! I knew this game would be terrible!" without acknowledging the fact the demo was a victim of the E3 setting more than anything else.

A lot of this IS on Ubisoft though. They are clearly aware of the negative reaction the E3 gameplay had for older fans of the franchise that have been trained to expect the worst from the company. They haven't responded, and that reflects really poorly upon them. That tells me that they either don't care, or they are so rigidly adhering to a marketing strategy that are unwilling to adjust. IMO they have to show more authentic and representative gameplay. Don't tell us that it's tactical, show us.

Many people here have stated that UBI does not have to show or tell us anything, and for the most part, I happen to agree with them but... the reason why I, in part, don't agree with them is because "THEY" said they wanted to come clean, they stated they wanted to show us hardcore fans that they care and that is not happening at the moment.

I just wanna say that I agree with y'all for this once. Lol.

I know right?... this is very confusing to say the least LOL

[Sp--pyBrown]

Many people here have stated that UBI does not have to show or tell us anything, and for the most part, I happen to agree with them but... the reason why I, in part, don't agree with them is because "THEY" said they wanted to come clean, they stated they wanted to show us hardcore fans that they care and that is not happening at the moment.


I know right?... this is very confusing to say the least LOL

Yes to all of this. Lol

[GiveMeTactical]

Show me the hype then? cuz I can't find it and want in.

Here... perhaps this can help?

if that wasn't already obvious I can't explain it better.

[timpbader]

What they've shown so far is really awful. I wonder if it will get pulled like the 2010 version of GRFS.

[SuperBiscotCOT]

What they've shown so far is really awful. I wonder if it will get pulled like the 2010 version of GRFS.

I feel like you are a litlle bit exagerating the reality and your only focus seems to be graphics as a majority of us are more intrested in the gameplay aspect of the game.
I'm ok with you personnal opinion but I feel like most of us want to see the hardcore gameplay side of the game rather than few graphic tweaks that will ( I'm almost sure ) be still improved until the realease of the game