A personal viewpoint. | Forums

[ThePollie]

Read the title, literally that. I do not professionally critique games, it isn't released yet, I have not played a demo, alpha, or any such thing. Everything mentioned is based on information provided by developers and reviewed in officially released footage. Leaked footage which may be subject to tampering or may offer misleading information has thus been excluded and has not been considered during the process of writing this. Given the reception of the post in another thread, I have opted to separate it for the benefit of those who might want the information, but may otherwise miss it buried in the thread.

1) The Gunsmith, despite its flaws, looks amazing. I have no game off the top of my head that touches this level of customization.
2) Despite a lack of proper viewing, the character creation appears equally in depth. A far improvement from Division's lackluster drool.
3) The game's audio design is solid. No complaints there, beyond the AI's apparent inability to react properly.
4) The environments are as varied as they are pretty. Even after the graphics down-grade, the game still looks gorgeous.
5) It's an open world Co-operative shooter with both stealth and blunt-force combat elements. Fantastic, truly. Name one other game like this.
6) A proper damage model. Those frustrated with goons in The Division eating a magazine or two and surviving need not worry.
7) A vast hanger's worth of vehicles, including sea and air, to suit any team's needs. Assuming anyone can drive, that is.
8) Very few games allow you to sport an appropriately manly beard, this one does.

There is a lot going for this game, I'm not going to deny that. But a load of good points does not simply erase faults in the game.

The AI, both allied and hostile, has displayed a level of shoddiness that can't be overlooked. Enemies have been observed acting virtually blind to the player, despite being clearly visible, and respond to obvious disturbances as calmly as a police officer observing a STOP sign. On the flip side, the AI team mates do not act like elite Ghosts. Their spacing is disgusting. One grenade would kill every last one. Your inability to command them one by one severely restricts tactics, and honestly leaves it feeling like a Rambo-simulation with the Ghosts acting as Sync-shot generators.

The Gunsmith being accessible at literally all times is disgustingly overpowered. That is a gross amount of raw, game-breaking power to put in a player's hands, and it destroys any sense of planning. There is no need to recon a sight to work out if you would want to bring a sniper rifle. If you realize this later once in the field, you can just open your TARDIS pocket and pull out something longer ranged. There is a satisfaction in planning something in detail and having it work, and this game is doing well to rob the player of it.

Admittedly this is supposed to be fixed by a higher difficulty, but the player is absurdly difficult to kill. Attribute this both to above-average base health and the regeneration factor, and the game loses more of its tactical edge. No longer need you be too worried of your positioning. If you get in trouble, just move between cover. Unless they can kill you outright, they never will. You can just run, stop and regenerate, and run again. Repeat until you have found a solution to your problem.

Animations are lackluster, and in some cases insulting. I've seen Takedowns in several videos that amount to kicking a man in the nads and just leaving him where he lies. Now, I've three brothers. We've thrown our share of punches, and let me tell you now, kicking a man down there hurts like unholy hell, but it will not stop someone for long. That sentry is not dead. He is in serious pain, but he will recover and will be back on his feet in a minute or so. Once he does, the alarms are going to be next.

I'm still on the fence about the progression system, with XP and finding guns. It has its pros and cons, but I'm leaning more toward favouring it, because that satisfaction of hunting down the gun you really want most, as opposed to have it gift-wrapped at no cost, is a quality of its own.

Now, I remain here because I want this game to succeed. Really, I do. I have had a harsh, miserable life. What few times I have to enjoy are often with my little brothers. Now, when this game first was presented, it seemed like a grand opportunity to sit down and play a game with them. A callback to our old days when we used to play the original Ghost Recon and Rainbow 6, SWAT4 and Delta Force. If the game turns out to be utter crap and fails, then that goes away. I'd rather it not. Now, I would love for someone to make an arguement against my problems with the game, offer me assurance it isn't as bad as it seems. Perhaps Ubisoft has done better, they just did a poor job of showing it.

All I can do is take what information I have and make my judgement from that.

[Cosmo_bozo]

I agree with all of that. The overall game concept appeals to me (and is something I have played about at creating with the ARMA 3 editor and some imagination) But I do see lots of problems. Along with some admittedly good stuff like the customisation and the world.

I will almost certainly buy it unless the beta is complete garbage, but whether I pay full price to have it at release or wait until I can pick it up for peanuts depends largely on how much the problems mentioned above affect the gameplay, especially the AI.

[MighThor]

As I see it, the gunsmith you have access to in mission, is the knowledge of the gun your character has. I do not think you can swap guns while in mission, only when accessing a weapons crate or when you are at a rally point.

[GiveMeTactical]

Well, if we are to believe in what that Butler dude says on the video... you have access to it ALL the time.

[TaxingUnicorn]

I agree with everything the OP has said here both positive and negative. There are some other things that have yet to be confirmed or denied, soul swapping, ability to unequip the second primary, AI's ability to drive and ability to customize your AI team are all things that I feel are natural additions and although I'm no game developer, they shouldnt be overly complicated to implement. Having said that, if those features were in the game, you'd think we'd have seen them already, then again it took this long for a glimpse at single player so....

[topeira1980]

I agree with everything the OP has said here both positive and negative. There are some other things that have yet to be confirmed or denied, soul swapping, ability to unequip the second primary, AI's ability to drive and ability to customize your AI team are all things that I feel are natural additions and although I'm no game developer, they shouldnt be overly complicated to implement. Having said that, if those features were in the game, you'd think we'd have seen them already, then again it took this long for a glimpse at single player so....

i think that if soul swapping was a part of the game we would have seen it in the 21min video.

also i doubt the AI can drive vehicles because in order to do that you will have to tell them where to drive somehow and i dont think there is any option to do that. there are no orders in the tactical map view and you cant tell the AI where to drive with a radial menu, or else you'd need to tell them to drive every 4 seconds.

the issue with the two primaries might be revealed somehow by the time the game (or beta) is out.

In the end' we've seen a lot of open world action\stealth games from UBI studios. if you ask me - i know what to expect from the game, from the AI, from the driving and shooting... if you expect a ghost recon game that looks and feels like 15 years ago than you are delusional. that makes a LOT less sense than to expect another UBI game that kinda reminds of a lot of other UBi games - a mix of Farcry, watch dogs and ghost recon. that is the most obvious result of what the game will look and play like. Me - im fine with that. it isnt the GR i'd love to see but as a person who loves all these other recent games i guess i wont be too disappointed if GR:W is executed well enough, technically.
sure, the story will be simple and shallow and only serve as a backdrop and an excuse to allow you to participate in all the missions.
The characters will be simple military goons without any interesting personality.
The stealth will be kinda mechanical and balanced to allow a mix of stealth and Action and going back and forth between them. not hyper realistic but as well made as AC, WD or SC.
The missions will most likely be very similar - The objective is simple and located in an open ended location where you complete it however you want. if you dont like this kind of missions the game will feel repetitive. if you do like them - you will enjoy the freedom.
it will be a decent game. nothing amazing but nothing crappy, unless you are a very negative person who loves to nitpick on flaws and disregard the pros - then it will be the worst thing since the dinosaurs died.
this is UBIsoft's game in a nutshell. it has been like this in the past 5 years or so and if you are expecting anything ground breaking than you dont know how AAA studios manage their risksand you've been blind to every GR:W footage so far. If you think that what you've seen this far is garbage than i seriously doubt you will be pleasantly surprised by farther information.

[EddieNES]

I can agree with this. We all know how Ubi is now. I think it'll be up to us to make this game what we want. Hopefully a lot of options can be turned off to up the difficulty. 1 shot kills sounds great. I just really hope the side missions offer some variation.

I'd think Splinter Cell would be the next reveal. Can't wait to see how the new Ubi treats it.

[TaxingUnicorn]

... if you expect a ghost recon game that looks and feels like 15 years ago than you are delusional. that makes a LOT less sense than to expect another UBI game that kinda reminds of a lot of other UBi games - a mix of Farcry, watch dogs and ghost recon. that is the most obvious result of what the game will look and play like. Me - im fine with that. it isnt the GR i'd love to see but as a person who loves all these other recent games i guess i wont be too disappointed if GR:W is executed well enough, technically.

I agree with you and by and large I am relatively excited about the game, I'd certainly be more excited if it were a bit more tactical and in depth with its squad AI commands, but I can live with things the way they are. It's really easy to make comparisons with other UBI games and that seems natural to the business model nowadays to recycle and share assets and structure.

Still though, I hope one day a developer takes the promise here and delivers a more serious hardcore tactical experience (on console - if I had a decent PC i'd probably just play ARMA)

So, if there isn't any soul swapping, I wonder if we will always play as Nomad in single player or if we will pick one from the 4...

[topeira1980]

The only serious known, IMO, about how well the game works, is the ghosts AI. how good do they function during stealth? is there a reason why in the 21min demo the player kept them behind? is this a sign the ghosts AI can easily break stealth?

this we just can not know, mainly because no other company gave us a game with AI that needs to remain stealthy without giving us the option to command them in depth.
most gamers would think about how unique this features is. how big deal it is. how it can make or break the SP game.
and thus it's the main feature i am worried about because in every stealth game you know - you play alone. now we have a team. is that team gonna ruin the gameplay or contribute to it?

[JeeNiNe]

Read the title, literally that. I do not professionally critique games, it isn't released yet, I have not played a demo, alpha, or any such thing. Everything mentioned is based on information provided by developers and reviewed in officially released footage. Leaked footage which may be subject to tampering or may offer misleading information has thus been excluded and has not been considered during the process of writing this. Given the reception of the post in another thread, I have opted to separate it for the benefit of those who might want the information, but may otherwise miss it buried in the thread.

1) The Gunsmith, despite its flaws, looks amazing. I have no game off the top of my head that touches this level of customization.
2) Despite a lack of proper viewing, the character creation appears equally in depth. A far improvement from Division's lackluster drool.
3) The game's audio design is solid. No complaints there, beyond the AI's apparent inability to react properly.
4) The environments are as varied as they are pretty. Even after the graphics down-grade, the game still looks gorgeous.
5) It's an open world Co-operative shooter with both stealth and blunt-force combat elements. Fantastic, truly. Name one other game like this.
6) A proper damage model. Those frustrated with goons in The Division eating a magazine or two and surviving need not worry.
7) A vast hanger's worth of vehicles, including sea and air, to suit any team's needs. Assuming anyone can drive, that is.
8) Very few games allow you to sport an appropriately manly beard, this one does.

There is a lot going for this game, I'm not going to deny that. But a load of good points does not simply erase faults in the game.

The AI, both allied and hostile, has displayed a level of shoddiness that can't be overlooked. Enemies have been observed acting virtually blind to the player, despite being clearly visible, and respond to obvious disturbances as calmly as a police officer observing a STOP sign. On the flip side, the AI team mates do not act like elite Ghosts. Their spacing is disgusting. One grenade would kill every last one. Your inability to command them one by one severely restricts tactics, and honestly leaves it feeling like a Rambo-simulation with the Ghosts acting as Sync-shot generators.

The Gunsmith being accessible at literally all times is disgustingly overpowered. That is a gross amount of raw, game-breaking power to put in a player's hands, and it destroys any sense of planning. There is no need to recon a sight to work out if you would want to bring a sniper rifle. If you realize this later once in the field, you can just open your TARDIS pocket and pull out something longer ranged. There is a satisfaction in planning something in detail and having it work, and this game is doing well to rob the player of it.

Admittedly this is supposed to be fixed by a higher difficulty, but the player is absurdly difficult to kill. Attribute this both to above-average base health and the regeneration factor, and the game loses more of its tactical edge. No longer need you be too worried of your positioning. If you get in trouble, just move between cover. Unless they can kill you outright, they never will. You can just run, stop and regenerate, and run again. Repeat until you have found a solution to your problem.

Animations are lackluster, and in some cases insulting. I've seen Takedowns in several videos that amount to kicking a man in the nads and just leaving him where he lies. Now, I've three brothers. We've thrown our share of punches, and let me tell you now, kicking a man down there hurts like unholy hell, but it will not stop someone for long. That sentry is not dead. He is in serious pain, but he will recover and will be back on his feet in a minute or so. Once he does, the alarms are going to be next.

I'm still on the fence about the progression system, with XP and finding guns. It has its pros and cons, but I'm leaning more toward favouring it, because that satisfaction of hunting down the gun you really want most, as opposed to have it gift-wrapped at no cost, is a quality of its own.

Now, I remain here because I want this game to succeed. Really, I do. I have had a harsh, miserable life. What few times I have to enjoy are often with my little brothers. Now, when this game first was presented, it seemed like a grand opportunity to sit down and play a game with them. A callback to our old days when we used to play the original Ghost Recon and Rainbow 6, SWAT4 and Delta Force. If the game turns out to be utter crap and fails, then that goes away. I'd rather it not. Now, I would love for someone to make an arguement against my problems with the game, offer me assurance it isn't as bad as it seems. Perhaps Ubisoft has done better, they just did a poor job of showing it.

All I can do is take what information I have and make my judgement from that.

+1 this sums up the good and bad pretty well