Banned
Senior Member
@Frag_Maniac
“I feel it would help if the player could perhaps toss rocks to lure enemies. Those distraction lure grenades in GRW are horrible.”
Rocks? Isn’t this game FarCry enough for you? That you want the option to throw rocks? Lol
The lures are not the problem, at least for me they aren’t. The AI on the other hand…if they can’t program the AI so they can react to nearby enemies and bypass them or hide when on stealth mode, then is a very poorly done AI. Yes, this is an open world, but like FarCry our objective is to clean up enemy bases which equals to a more linear path and yet, they are not able to program the AI for that.
The players job is to manage your AI with a cautious approach, meaning that if you give orders and do not watch out and they get detected, is your fault but if the AI is able to move on their own with or without your permission (which is fine) why they can’t go around or hide from enemies on stealth mode? Because the devs are lazy. That’s why they become invisible or just do not enter the area until you told them to do it, just like in Operation Watchman, the AI stays behind to avoid detection, that’s Ubisoft’s solution to a very poorly done AI.
@Lamoi
“And penalised for not using the RPG elements? HOW?
I play on EXTREME, and I upgrade nothing. I just unlock the flash bang, mines, C4 and drone battery /range..
That’s why unlike alot of you folks Im not bothered about NG+... Because I can unlock everything I want pretty much in the first couple of hours.”
Well for starters, to say you get penalized for nor upgrading rpg elements Is not the right way to say it but @ GiveMeTactical has the right idea.
I also play on extreme with in my opinion are realistic upgrades, everything else like bullet resistance, more damage to vehicles and whatever other stupidity they added, gets ignored by me.
However, the game expects you to have actually upgraded those perks, you can compare your playthrough to somebody else that has most or all of the perks unlocked and you will see that their life is a lot easier, they obviously can still suffer because of the difficulty but your suffering is going to be a lot worse than theirs. Now let’s check another difficulty mode and dlc’s
On Tier 1 (whatever you like this mode or not is irrelevant) once you reached a certain level of difficulty ( I believe 30 or 25 but I could be wrong) you get killed with two or three bullets even with the bullet resistance perk however you still have an good selection of perks that can make your life easier, if you decide to not upgrade perks and not upgrade the level of your weapons then this mode is going to be a nightmare (believe im doing it right now) from start to end because of how hard it is. It is playable but again not as playable as it can be if you upgrade your skills and weapons.
Fallen Ghost’s is my last example, why we are forced to start with a fully upgraded character? Because the DLC was made for that and is still a very complicated experience and like Tier 1 you get killed really fast on extreme but your other upgrades are still going make it easier. If they ever added an option to lock certain perks then you are going to see the suffering that involves not playing with perks vs playing with them.
The game is design around that mostly on the difficulty. On the regular campaign the game is perfectly playable on extreme without them but is a lot harder than it would’ve been with them. It was the same story with the first GR, you could upgrade stealth and stuff like that, again useless and stupid -perk system, it should’ve died with that game, everything else that came after didn’t have stupid skill trees.
This is the reality of Ghost Recon Wildlands perk system. That’s why I want a new game plus, not to start with everything upgraded but to start with the upgrades that I should have from the start to begin with and to have all the weapons unlocked as it should be.
Senior Member
@ GMT —- another false statement about the gameplay refuted! Keep em coming homie!)
@ Lonespymaster — Fallen Ghosts was bizarre... Why they assumed that we would want a fully upgraded character I have no idea. It nearly ruined Fallen Ghosts for me.
—> see another thing we agree on Lonespymaster! How marvellous...
I’m sure when I post my thoughts on Wildlands 2, we will disagree again, and the world will make sense once more!
A lot of the skills in this game are completely at odds with creating a realistic experience.
That’s why I say I hardly unlock anything in this game that could be considered an upgrade.
I unlock all the equipment obviously, flash bangs, mines, C4, Flare, Thermal vision. And upgrade the Drones range and battery. I do unlock the noisemaker (as it widens gameplay options) and thermal vision for the drone.
But I don’t upgrade it’s stealth, speed, armour etc.
I think the drone at default is as realistic as you can make it.
The Enemy AI can spot it and shoot it down easily. I think this makes it again as realistic as you can make it.
I also tend to upgrade the rebel support, but really only Diversion and Guns for Hire. Only because it gives you some wider gameplay options.
Everything else, ALL the character upgrades, I don’t bother with.
I think the game at default, from the start is set up as realistic as the game allows you to have it.
- Sprinting. Considering the weight of your gear, I think the default sprint is realistic and should not be upgraded further
- Same goes for Bullet resistance. A couple of shots can drop you, and that’s how it should be. I don’t like how your health magically regenerates — but hey ho...
Would prefer a more traditional health mechanic like field medkits...
- Stealth. I think the Enemy AI’s cone of vision has a good distance, and it’s more realistic to not limit this. So I don’t upgrade stealth as well, as it just limits their ability to see you. So again, I don’t bother.
So that’s why I’m not so bothered about NG+ - I can unlock most of the stuff I want in the first 2hrs of play.
I do understand the guns and attachments have to be unlocked again — and that’s what frustrates people. And I agree that this is annoying.
Banned
Actually rock tossing is about the least over the top thing in Far Cry games. IMO a grenade that pops a little puff of green smoke is more of an obvious indication an enemy is near than the mere tossing of a rock. For one, rocks are more meant to distract via sound than an obvious sign of human trickery, such as something that gives off colored smoke. No fool is going to say, "Hmm, what's that"?, and just casually walk over to it. Whereas with the sound of a rock hitting something, it could be anything, even a small animal stirring about. The Diversion Lure is not much more believable than the balloon decoys in MGSV, or throwing away empty mags, but rocks are very real and everywhere in a place like Bolivia.Originally Posted by LoneSpymaster Go to original post
And apparently you didn't read all I said on the subject of what the AI needs because I clearly stated if they can scale fences, and mantle rocks, they should be able to put in enough AI paths to allow them to get to areas away from the eyes of enemies. And if by chance they are somewhere where there is no path with which to do so, they should just say something like "No can do boss, enemies close". At which point it's up to the player to take out that enemy, or have another squad mate do so if they add individual commands, which has been heavily requested and is very needed.
Senior Member
Totally agree about the rocks vs diversion lure...
Which is more likely to give away that there’s a military presence in the area? A rock or an empty military grade smoke grenade? Lol
Also with regard to the Team AI. I have not played a game yet that successfully delivered consistent AI that could be relied on to any great degree.
So I don’t think it’s necessarily ‘lazy’ programming. It’s quite difficult to do.
Where’s the evidence it’s difficult to do? NO OTHER GAME HAS EVER BEEN ABLE TO DO IT.....
SO — The answer? FULL CONTROL. Being able to separate your squad I would think is a no brainer!
INDIVIDUAL ORDERS are absolutely essential for a tactical squad based shooter.
Banned
Banned
Yeah individual squad commands would go a long way toward alleviating most squad AI quirks I think, as long as the player uses those commands sensibly.Originally Posted by LaMOi Go to original post
Banned
I can not argue that Diversion Lures would have been more Far Cry-ish and rocks my Ghost Recon but I can see the similarities that Lonespymaster is throwing. Truth be told, with all the gadgets, even by today's technology, these badass operators should have some sort of rattle device use for diversion... I always thought the diversion lure was the most stupid gadget one can use and I seldom use it because, 1,- I feel really really stupid using it and 2,- it is extremely un-user friendly to do so, more so when you are in confined areas.
Member
On the topic of GRW2 location specifically I think setting the open world in SE Asia would make sense. The ghosts could be deployed to topple drug cartels in that part of the world and it would potentially give a lot of variety of types of terrain for us to ghost it up in. Africa could be interesting as well although the conflicts are generally limited and have less international impact. Maybe NE/eastern Africa so we have jungles in the south and desert in the north with some high desert/mountains separating the two. Perhaps if Africa is the setting the primary antagonist could be extremist/terrorist groups united and controlling the region which are beginning to export their ideology abroad using various criminal enterprises to fund their activities.
In either of these proposed locations one arm of the enemy structure could be human trafficking as it is an issue in both locations. It was a topic which was only loosely addressed in GRW but it could be expanded to give the operation more emotional depth. That being said I really love GRW and think it was a well rounded game which holds up still with the issues it has. I am still playing it in all capacities (campaign, narco road, fallen ghosts, ghost mode) and it has plenty of replay value in my opinion. I am glad Ubisoft is still adding content, and while some mission threads for Monte Puncu, and La Cruz would be nice (maybe for production and influence respectively) I have not gotten bored with the game.
These are a few things which would potentially be cool new mechanics to implement for a sequel:
- Temporarily securing villages: not like in Far Cry when you secure an outpost and it's secure unless you manually reactivate it but a way in which you could clear enemies from villages/crossroads/compounds and they would remain clear of enemies for a time and then fall back into enemy control. That way you could clear something out and know it would be secure for a while, then later as you travel through you begin taking fire once again and know that it needs to be retaken. This would add variety to traversing the map rather than just knowing "oh I'm going to pass X location and we always take fire coming through there." Currently clearing enemies from villages feels a bit pointless because once you leave you know the same patrols and strong points will be active when you turn around and pass through again.
- Multi-factional enemies: I've seen this mentioned in other threads but I want to propose something similar here. Instead of having one monolithic organization to take down perhaps the different branches (influence, security, production, smuggling for example from GRW) could be different groups which manage their own operations and have a tenuous alliance with each other. It would be interesting if you could weaken one of these groups and perhaps they become much more aggressive in the areas they still control because they see the other branches maintaining strength and feel more threatened. I don't know how you would balance this system with the difficulty designation for each province but it's an idea to have more variation in multiple play throughs. Another factor which would be interesting to exploit having different factions control these ops would be the ability to maybe pit them against each other. Is the influence faction losing control of their territory? Maybe the faction running security begins pushing in on the edges of their territory. Maybe the factions fight each other (similar to pitting SB and Unidad against each other) when one group enters the others territory. If smugglers chase you into an area controlled by production perhaps they fight each other as well as gunning for the ghosts. One of my favorite ways to stay undetected and sow chaos is to get the rebels, Unidad, and SB all in a massive fire fight with each other. It can be a fun mechanic to exploit and adds a challenge having to sneak through what feels like a very active war zone
- Crossing national borders: This ties to my previous idea but rather than having one country as our open world perhaps there are two countries and the ghosts have to adopt very different tactics to operate on different sides of the border. (For example if the game were to be set in SE Asia maybe the jungles of Myanmar have a less disciplined army, but if you cross into southern China the military is better equipped and harder to deal with). This could also allow the potential of factional warfare to become even more chaotic with two national armies trading shots, the enemy cartel or whoever shooting at both militaries, and rebels in the mix as well. Perhaps different provinces could have more porous borders making it easier to cross while others could be much more tightly controlled. This would be too chaotic if the enemy organization was multi-factional as well, that would turn into a huge mess real fast... it would be nice however if you are pursued by the national army of one country and manage to cross the border out of their jurisdiction rather than just being chased forever by one military for miles on end. Maybe some enemy operations only take place in one of these countries while others take place across the border in the other country. This would give the feeling that you are actually dealing with a multinational criminal enterprise and seeing it in action rather than a single narco-state whose multinational activities are only mentioned/shown in briefings. The game could still be a fully open world from the get go with varying levels of difficulty for provinces but there would be a lot more considerations to make if you decided to operate in a given area before leveling up/getting better equipment for your team. Something I noticed playing GRW the first time was that as long as your tactics were sound it didn't really matter if you went straight to a level 5 difficulty area after Itacua. It felt intimidating at first but that quickly faded away.
- More wildlife: I know this will be controversial and I want to be clear that I don't want the next GRW to be a military Far Cry but the occasional predator in the wild would be nice. In GRW I never have to worry about a crocodile no matter how far I swim through a swamp, or up a river in the jungles.. I can crawl through the brush in the deserts or mountains and not once have to worry about snakes near rocks or bushes.. no large cats or bears factor into my operations in wooded areas. I don't want the frequency of animal attacks as in Far Cry by any means, and it would be seriously annoying if you were sniping lots of enemies and remaining undetected on a mission and then a jaguar goes nuts on you and blows your cover BUT all I'm saying is it would be nice if once in a while the wildlands actually felt a bit more WILD. The terrain should be an occasional enemy to contend with rather than traversal being the most difficult aspect it adds.
- A bit more dynamic weather: In GRW it is usually either sunny, cloudy, or stormy. In Fallen Ghosts it feels like it rains more often (maybe it's just my perception but I think the storms seem more intense) but by and large it's the same weather as the main game. If we get snowy mountains why not have actual snowfall or perhaps a blizzard? In areas like Koani why not have the occasional sandstorm/shamal? More mist in mornings would be cool as well as thicker fog so you stumble into enemies unless you are checking occasionally with thermal optics. This ties to my previous point that the terrain should be more of a factor to consider. I love the way in which each province has its own unique feel and I like that for the most part the transitions between biomes don't feel abrupt and like they are just slapped together but additional weather factors could enhance this substantially.
Weight for gear: This is something which was present in older Tom Clancy titles (see Rainbow Six Vegas 2) where equipping more armor would increase protection while reducing mobility. Perks like bullet resistance can coexist with this principle as well, but it seems silly that wearing a t-shirt protects from just as much enemy fire as the heavy IBA. It makes me feel a bit silly gearing up a heavy combat outfit knowing that it is strictly cosmetic. Also different weapons have no effect on your mobility. Sure they have their own characteristics and stats but a player carrying a PDW and shorty shotgun moves just as fast and smoothly as one equipped with an LMG and .50cal sniper rifle. The equipment weight mechanic was present in the old SOCOM games, maybe the next GRW could take a note from their book on this one?
That's all I can think of for the moment, I may throw additional ideas out there as I think of them but I want to quickly address some of the ideas I've seen in this thread:
Open world: I grew up playing the original Ghost Recon games and enjoyed them thoroughly, but I don't think GRW2 should move away from the open world formula. This is Ghost Recon Wildlands, not simply Ghost Recon. Going back to a level system would drastically limit the replay value for so many of the reasons already mentioned.. the challenges for each level to unlock gear is much more of a hassle than simply going out and finding the equipment you want from the start. Some of the sections in GRFS felt so linear that it was honestly a bit boring, you fought your way down essentially the same corridor and always engaged enemies from the same angles with very limited space (if at all) to try out new tactics. Over a year into GRW and I am still finding new ways to approach situations whether it is a route that I have only just discovered or a completely different tactic to employ the open world formula offers so much more in the way of replay value and rewards player ingenuity that I can't imagine a GRW game which didn't have that as a key element to it's design.
Diversion lures: I totally agree that they are silly. A good idea at it's core but I never use them because it feels dumb chucking a smoke grenade and only one or two enemies nearby investigate, then upon finding the source they just shrug and go "hmm I wonder what that was about, oh well.. back to my post." It would be a dead giveaway that operators are in the area, and while a rock would make more sense it would be silly for special forces to have to unlock the "Throw a Rock" skill... there has to be a happy middle ground, and I will leave that to brighter minds to determine. The flare gun beats the diversion lure in almost every way and while I don't make much use of that either I honestly only unlock the first level of Div. Lure so I can get the final perk on that skill tree..otherwise it goes wanting.
Squad controls: I've been banging on about this in other threads so I will keep it brief, but yes this is essential to add to a sequel (if not the current game as well in a patch). Games like the SOCOM titles (before they went all Michael Bay), Operation Flashpoint (Red River specifically once they dialed it in), and SWAT 3/4 all are great sources of inspiration for this mechanic. Ordering an AI squad member to restrain a surrendering enemy, or to breach bang/frag and clear a room, or even to cover/suppress a specific zone would be sooo helpful. Even just ordering one of them to man a weapon mounted on a vehicle while the rest of the team spreads out along a road would be more realistic and immersive. I hate it that if I want my team to use a vehicle mounted weapon I have to sit in the drivers seat like a moron unable to use my own weapon, and my other team mates hang out the windows and shoot gangsta style. If this were part of the thought process from the beginning it would be so helpful and add a lot in terms of tactics which is kinda what tactical shooters should be about. Obviously some would not make use of this properly or adequately and would see this as cumbersome to have to manage your squad more actively but once the learning curve is passed it would be a boon to players who take the time to understand and master it. A squad leader should have those responsibilities (when dealing with AI obviously) because after all... they should be leading! No NCO in combat ever says "yeah you guys just do whatever you think is right but don't wander off too far!"
Senior Member
Agree on both counts. Scrap the lures. Why would they take up kit space with it. Far better to throw rocks, bottles or anything else that comes to hand. A bottle smashing could be heard from a decent distance to attract attention, but could easily to written off. If the lures were to be kept, they could be changed to, well, basically, stink bombs. As in a little glass vial that stinks like a gas leak. May still not be realistic, but it’s a little more plausible.Originally Posted by LaMOi Go to original post
And 100% yes to team orders.
And breaching charges.
Like the idea of Africa or Asia as a setting. Could be a selection of themes. Drugs, blood diamonds, maybe topple a regime.
