Ghost War 4v4 PvP? Its a Good Start, But Not Enough | Forums

[Solanthel]

I understand Ghost Recon Wildlands never had intention to give PvP to begin with til all the backlash about it needs PvP to boost sales, which is the reason why we are getting PvP late cause they had to develop a game mode and work on it. Totally understandable. However, 4v4 is not enough.

I am very happy about the news, but my concern is that it wont last that long. I really ask the developers to get us more game modes with higher count PvP player teams than a silly 4v4. I'd really like to see this game allow us to have customized lobbys so we can add our now restrictions such a pistols only. 8v8, no respawns, 5 minute clock, no drone, no explosives and what not.

I remember when Modern Warfare and Medal of Honor came out. I didnt play it cause alot of us were geeked out on GRAW 2.. If this game turns out as epic as GRAW2.. i probably wont even care much for CoD WW2.

I am still highly anticipated for Ghost Recon even tho im bored of it already cause all i have is the Tier stuff left, but I love the franchisee and knowing how cool GRAW 1 & 2 were. i still have faith that this game can really put its best potential into it considering its a next gen game

Devs. i know you are doing your best to keep the community happy by adding something unique, but please consider making the multiplayer similar to GRAW also. in fact if you want to be like EA Battlefield. I'd even rent a server to set up the game how i want and how many of us liked but i dont think that would be necessary tho iu'd pay for it just to have it, but we know if you can do it on GRAW you can also do it on Wildlands

Sorry for ranting. I say it all with respect. Thank you for hearing me out and I really hope you consider.

But if that is too much to ask then lets just make a Remastered GRAW 2. or XBOX 1 backwards compatible. I'd be totally fine with that

[FPVPHATERS]

If you read in-between the lines, you'll clearly see that the devs have already considered each and every thing you just mentioned....

Example: When that one YouTuber start talking about how passionate they are and how they listen to the community which others companies don't, you'll see where they pan toward the white board with all those posted notes? Light bulb going off?

EXAMPLE 2: That younger Twitcher mentioned and I quote that " THE no respawn mode they played was all he wanted " which means there are at least 2 modes... I'd say it's 3 because the dev mentioned how you could place something down near the RECON antenna ( something like that ) and we all know there's nothing objective-based in TD?? Huh?? Can you smell it now buddy!!!

I can almost guarantee a rise in PLAYER TEAM COUNT by at least one by the time they finish beta testing!! PURE EPICNESS awaits...

If the community shows up for this mode, i can almost guarantee additional maps in random updates from here on out!! UBI is testing the market... If this fails, we may never see another GR... Let's go Socom Vets!!! It's time to take over!!

[DexLuther]

All I want is the large teams we used to have in the Originals and GR2 plus match options and Siege mode!

[D-from-Oxford]

Siege. Breach. Espionage. Hostage Rescue. VIP Escort/Extraction. There is a lot of room for epicness here. Preferably proper lobbies on dedicated servers - don't wanna keep seeing 'migrating host' every few minutes from rage quiting, lol.

[Gmoneymozart]

The pvp should be at minimum 8v8.

But I'm going to assume the game modes will be dull there will be no innovation or break through ideas and it will get boring fast with small maps to accommodate the 4v4 match ups.

[Gmoneymozart]

Siege. Breach. Espionage. Hostage Rescue. VIP Escort/Extraction. There is a lot of room for epicness here. Preferably proper lobbies on dedicated servers - don't wanna keep seeing 'migrating host' every few minutes from rage quiting, lol.

Lol you're not getting socom

[AI BLUEFOX]

Guys, there are lots of aspects about PvP that I would like to see in the game, modes and player counts and lobbies etc etc, as I was a huge PvP fan from GR2 through to GRAW2. However, in that video when you see the team reveal PvP to us, that really was the first time any of us knew that they really were going to do it. Even the night before when we met up with the Dev team from Bucharest, we were told they were here to talk ballistics with us. Of course we teased them mercilessly, suspecting PvP, and told them their cover story really was a load of ballistics, but I did still have my doubts the next morning.

The development of games now is different. The testing of the "experience" from the user perspective, the significance of slight mistakes that can turn millions and millions of dollars of investment into dust on the back of viral driven whims expressed on social media and the complexity of synchronising players across continents (Sony and MS insist) all mean that the publishers are reluctant to throw a load of choices at a diverse community and see what shapes up. I expect to see narrower, deeper choices rather than broader shallower options for all games, not just GR. R6 has done this; there being choices such as the hardcore mode, but this is changing HUD options and doesn't extend to allowing players to change player counts or number of objectives or to create unbalanced teams and restrict weapons. Future Soldier also started along this road. The risk is that the diversity will please a small niche of dedicated enthusiasts - like us guys here - but alienate most others and it's not about being aloof about being hardcore and looking down your nose at casual, it's about the accessibility of the game for those not familiar with it.

My own view on all this, and you all know us much as I do now (finally I can post about PvP without having to check what I might be revealing) is to only go on what you know and what Ubisoft has said. I'm not reading between the lines on what Ampy said about liking the mode we played therefore there must be other modes, err might be but no you can't conclude that, I'm not assuming that because GR therefore GR as I want it and I am not expecting to automatically get anything we have had before just on the basis we had it before. We can get a whole load of expectation and anticipation going based on guesswork and speculation only to be disappointed because a particular feature that we have come to associate with our GR experience is missing or changed. It isn't one feature that made GR PvP, though, it was the overall feeling. All I am expecting is intense and rewarding teamwork because that is the GR brand in PvP and everything else is just the Devs choice to support that, whatever that may be.

[Just Fugu]

Guys, there are lots of aspects about PvP that I would like to see in the game, modes and player counts and lobbies etc etc, as I was a huge PvP fan from GR2 through to GRAW2. However, in that video when you see the team reveal PvP to us, that really was the first time any of us knew that they really were going to do it. Even the night before when we met up with the Dev team from Bucharest, we were told they were here to talk ballistics with us. Of course we teased them mercilessly, suspecting PvP, and told them their cover story really was a load of ballistics, but I did still have my doubts the next morning.

The development of games now is different. The testing of the "experience" from the user perspective, the significance of slight mistakes that can turn millions and millions of dollars of investment into dust on the back of viral driven whims expressed on social media and the complexity of synchronising players across continents (Sony and MS insist) all mean that the publishers are reluctant to throw a load of choices at a diverse community and see what shapes up. I expect to see narrower, deeper choices rather than broader shallower options for all games, not just GR. R6 has done this; there being choices such as the hardcore mode, but this is changing HUD options and doesn't extend to allowing players to change player counts or number of objectives or to create unbalanced teams and restrict weapons. Future Soldier also started along this road. The risk is that the diversity will please a small niche of dedicated enthusiasts - like us guys here - but alienate most others and it's not about being aloof about being hardcore and looking down your nose at casual, it's about the accessibility of the game for those not familiar with it.

My own view on all this, and you all know us much as I do now (finally I can post about PvP without having to check what I might be revealing) is to only go on what you know and what Ubisoft has said. I'm not reading between the lines on what Ampy said about liking the mode we played therefore there must be other modes, err might be but no you can't conclude that, I'm not assuming that because GR therefore GR as I want it and I am not expecting to automatically get anything we have had before just on the basis we had it before. We can get a whole load of expectation and anticipation going based on guesswork and speculation only to be disappointed because a particular feature that we have come to associate with our GR experience is missing or changed. It isn't one feature that made GR PvP, though, it was the overall feeling. All I am expecting is intense and rewarding teamwork because that is the GR brand in PvP and everything else is just the Devs choice to support that, whatever that may be.

The bold section, that is the problem from my communities posts.

They have listend to the select few. and the select few will not have voiced the opinion of the majority.

To me they are going down the Casual Root for PVP and not competitive aspects which the past GR titles gave.

GR:FS the devs kept using the words Tactics, Team work but it was far from it.

Tactics and team work is done in the head. Not the game giving you perks which creates tactics and team work, from the perks provided.

[Just Fugu]

The pvp should be at minimum 8v8.

But I'm going to assume the game modes will be dull there will be no innovation or break through ideas and it will get boring fast with small maps to accommodate the 4v4 match ups.

Ghost Recons have always been a Max of 8 players per team.
this isn't Battlefield.


but I also think 4v4 is a low count which also will mean small noobie choke point &camping behind boxes

6v6 on decent sized maps which flanking options is what provides tactics and teamwork, which was the most used words in their videos.

[D-from-Oxford]

Tactics and team work is done in the head. Not the game giving you perks which creates tactics and team work, from the perks provided.

^This.