Ghost Recon Wildlands 2 | Forums

[El_Cuervacho]

At the very least, this game's unfinished and woefully unfocussed for a genre title.

I still remember how perplexed I was when I first saw that loading screen from Wildlands, the one with the cars.
I sincerely thought to myself: they must've misplaced some promotional screenshot from "The Crew" and somehow found it's way here.
How wrong I was...

[Pops_5116]

I’d like more reconnaissance and planning in Ghost Recon Wildlands 2. This would be implemented assuming they use the same process of gathering intel to start missions and then adding the OPTION to capture or kill bosses/underbosses.
After collecting intel to start story missions, we know where the specific mission is located. As it is right now, in GRW1, if a compound or FOB is revealed on the map, you can move the cursor over the name of the location and it tells you what is in the compound. Such as the numbers of SAM launchers, drone jammers, turrets, mortars, generators, alarms and so on. I think it would be better if we didn’t automatically have that information. Once given the mission, we’d be given the OPTION to plan a recon mission beforehand by initiating it at a safe-house. In the safe house would be a mission planning board. We would choose time of day(assuming a time skip mechanic is made as an option) and how to insert and leave the area. Either drive or fly to and from location ourselves, or have an AI do it from a few predetermined LZs similar to MGSV. These LZs would be a bit further from the objective area to allow stealth options. We would choose how many members of our team we want to bring along, and which specific members. We’d choose weapons, clothing, gear for ourselves and our team. Once on location, we use binoculars or scopes to mark the things in the compound that I mentioned earlier (SAMs, turrets, generators, etc.), vantage points, along with enemy personnel and their types of weapons. When we feel recon is completed, we may leave as planned or improvise. After the recon mission is complete, we may have the OPTION to travel back to the safe house to plan the actual mission or start the mission then. If we choose to return to the safe house, we can go to the mission planning board. The mission planning board has now marked all of the objects (SAMS, generators, turrets, etc) along with vantage points, and number of enemy personnel and their weapon types. Then we would choose the time of day of the mission (assuming a time skip mechanic is made as an option). Then, choose character and team loadout. Next, choose how to get to the area which would have the same options as before with some additional LZs that are closer to the objective area. The closer LZs are riskier and more likely to start alerts. It would however, give options to hover over locations and allow the team to rappel onto buildings so they may move to breach that building(assuming proper breach commands are given to AI). If a stealthy approach is taken, you may direct AI teammates to vantage points to act as overwatch. At anytime you may change tactics and team AI ROE to better suit your situation. After completing the objective, we may leave as planned or have to improvise an escape route.

[Multicut]

I think it would be better to improve the present GR and keep releasing dlc.

If Ubi cant explore the GRWL full potential, there's no reason for a second one.

[Pops_5116]

I agree that it would be better to improve the game and add DLC. However, every time something has been added to the game, new bugs and glitches occur. To add new features and abilities for this game, they may run into many problems just trying to build on to what they currently have. It may be better from them to start another game to add the features we’d all like to see. Also, as large and great the Wildlands Bolivia is, I don’t want to keep playing that same map and story forever. I greatly enjoy the game and I would love for another Ghost Recon to build upon and improve what makes this one enjoyable.

[Virtual-Chris]

As EP5116 mentions above, I would like more Intel gathering. For example rather than having a key source of Intel marked on a map, make it like the Mole Hunt in Fallen Ghosts where you get a photo and a probably location and you need to identify the source and talk to them. And maybe you need to talk to multiple sources to get what you need.

And where you need to tail someone to find someone else or some location, make it require a bit more effort than just showing up and following along. Put the NPC on a daily pattern and we need to be at the right place at the right time or stake out a location to find them.

For time critical missions (e.g. La Plaga is leaving the country) don’t make that dependent on when the player gets around to it. Give them 24hrs to get the mission done (or whatever is reasonable) from the event that triggered it.

And finally, mission briefings should set better expectations. I don’t know how many times I prepared a stealth infiltration mission only to be forced to defend a location from waves of enemies. If this is a possibility, the briefing should make that clear so you can equip and plan accordingly. Of course, I’m not talking about when **** goes sideways, but scripted defensive phases in missions that have no business being like that. For example, you can painstakingly eliminate all enemies in stealth in the Bank Vault mission, and still end up surprised that you’re in defensive mode for 3minutes waiting for the Rebels to arrive (that you already had on standby). Frustrating AF! And there are many of these.

And please allow a friendly faction to provide Helo insertion or extraction.

[Pops_5116]

Virtual Rain, those are some great suggestions, especially the intel gathering. That would make it feel more like actually gathering intel instead of just picking up another collectible that’s littered across the map.

When it comes to tailing someone, your idea is perfect for allowing the player to immerse themselves into the game world. It would feel significantly less scripted.

Your time sensitive mission idea is simple but makes great sense. Make the time critical mission actually time critical. Adds more excitement into the scenario.

Better mission briefings would be great. Your example reminds me of my feelings of the Splinter Cell mission. Thought it was going to be all stealth and sneaking until it was an all out rampage. And of course AI teammates run outside the building, instead of holding position while firing, causing them to get mowed down. But AI team is a whole different story. Thanks for your suggestions. They should be paying you for your ideas

[OneFromHell]

I would love a part 2. This game is amazing.

[Virtual-Chris]

Virtual Rain, those are some great suggestions, especially the intel gathering. That would make it feel more like actually gathering intel instead of just picking up another collectible that’s littered across the map.

When it comes to tailing someone, your idea is perfect for allowing the player to immerse themselves into the game world. It would feel significantly less scripted.

Your time sensitive mission idea is simple but makes great sense. Make the time critical mission actually time critical. Adds more excitement into the scenario.

Better mission briefings would be great. Your example reminds me of my feelings of the Splinter Cell mission. Thought it was going to be all stealth and sneaking until it was an all out rampage. And of course AI teammates run outside the building, instead of holding position while firing, causing them to get mowed down. But AI team is a whole different story. Thanks for your suggestions. They should be paying you for your ideas

LOL... yeah, that Splinter Cell mission is a classic example. There are many like that which are simply impossible for someone to complete without prior knowledge of what happens. What if you are playing that in Ghost Mode or just role playing it properly and you equip a silent SMG for that mission, thinking it’s stealth, then finding out you really should have brought an anti-material rifle, a machine gun, a mortar team, and had a squadron of Rebels standing by? Of course, due to lose game design, you don’t need to do any planning ahead of time, you can just change everything mid mission in the blink of an eye. Total immersion breaking, but they give you no choice.


Those are the worst kind of missions in my opinion. A mission needs to be achievable on the first play through for a reasonably skilled player. Any mission that requires playing so many times, you feel like Tom Cruise in Edge of Tomorrow, is a failure in design.

[Pops_5116]

I like this game a lot. I think they did a great job on it. Though, I must say, i think it lacks depth in a lot of big ways. The potential is all there like examples you’ve given and others have given. It seems like they were headed in the right direction, but time and/or money was the issue. They went with what they had, and what they felt could be big selling points.

It feels like their big selling point was a co-op shoot-‘em-up in a large world. A few of the suggestions that were requested for single player, that should’ve been there since release, can be pretty much implemented in co-op. Some of these things are the ability to customize your team (which was implemented for AI in year 2 instead of from release), the ability to change team loadout (in co-op, each player can have 2 different weapon types that could suit those surprise rampage/defense missions, throw gadgets/grenades, etc), give in depth team commands/tactics/ROE, teammates being able to drive/fly, and I’m sure there are some more examples. If co-op play will be their main focus for the next one, I hope the single player experience matches it by having those similar options from the start. But over all, I hope they take the time to expand on each game mechanic/capability to add to the depth and detail.

[B_616e6f6e]

I like this game a lot. I think they did a great job on it. Though, I must say, i think it lacks depth in a lot of big ways. The potential is all there like examples you’ve given and others have given. It seems like they were headed in the right direction, but time and/or money was the issue. They went with what they had, and what they felt could be big selling points.

It feels like their big selling point was a co-op shoot-‘em-up in a large world. A few of the suggestions that were requested for single player, that should’ve been there since release, can be pretty much implemented in co-op. Some of these things are the ability to customize your team (which was implemented for AI in year 2 instead of from release), the ability to change team loadout (in co-op, each player can have 2 different weapon types that could suit those surprise rampage/defense missions, throw gadgets/grenades, etc), give in depth team commands/tactics/ROE, teammates being able to drive/fly, and I’m sure there are some more examples. If co-op play will be their main focus for the next one, I hope the single player experience matches it by having those similar options from the start. But over all, I hope they take the time to expand on each game mechanic/capability to add to the depth and detail.

This. There was a lot of wasted potential in GRW.