[Question] Did this game die? | Forums

[Mr Wet Poopz]

They definitely will be at E3 this year but as I mentioned earlier, the announcement yesterday stated the console versions will now be delayed until first half of 2019 while PC will be out in Sept 2018.

Despite having to wait a little longer, this is a good thing. Delays, in my opinion, are always beneficial to the consumer in the long run. This gives them more time to optimize the product on console before releasing it to the general public.

Plus, it's a very admirable thing when companies temporarily put aside profits for the sake of quality. There isn't enough of that in today's industry.

[Kean_1]

Despite having to wait a little longer, this is a good thing. Delays, in my opinion, are always beneficial to the consumer in the long run. This gives them more time to optimize the product on console before releasing it to the general public.

Plus, it's a very admirable thing when companies temporarily put aside profits for the sake of quality. There isn't enough of that in today's industry.

Yeah, I don't have a problem with it. I'm bummed of course but if it's not done, then it's not done.

I was also bummed about the delays with RDR2 and while R* caught heat from some on that, I'm glad they took the extra time they need to get the product ready. ....speaking of which, that game should help carry me into next year when it releases in October this year.

[TF1-UN1TY]

Yeah, same here. I much prefer HC modes.

......and that's another thing. HC modes are nothing new or unique. Some very popular shooters that have similar components (e.g. class based, perks, tech, marking, etc.) in their PvP titles also include HC modes in their games.

I don't think it's a matter of balancing (because I think it's obvious that it can be done) but more a resistance to compromising on removing or adjusting elements in their game.

Personally, I think Custom Match could be invaluable in collecting data on what fans prefer. The only problem is that without a matchmaking system (or lobby in this case) many of us simply can't gather up enough friends at any given time to play.

.....c 'est la vie.

Kean has been advocating for custom lobby's with matchmaking since day 1. I was on the fence for awhile but wouldn't mind it one bit now.

[TF1-UN1TY]

...and it was the only manscaping post we ever needed.

[xxFratosxx]

It is so unfortunate that Ubisoft literally did everything they could in their power to kill this game. My only question is why? Why would they waste money and manpower to ruin a game of this calliber?

I wouldn't say they waste money. For one thing Ubisoft used an annoying business strategy to announce that 4v4 PvP(Ghost War) will be coming a few days before the actual game launched. They literally sold alot of players including myself thinking PvP is right around the corner but didn't have any ideal it will take 6 months to release let alone a 4 month beta test to be released after. So this tactic they used had grw #1 game seller in the first few months. During this time, those who like PvE DLC actually purchased the season pass and didn't know anything about Narco Road being a huge upset to most and fallen ghost which was the only good add on for this game. Worst, when PvP did came out, we didn't expect all the classes, thermal, limited weapons, no weapon customization/ loadout the campaign has, and much more.

So I can talk all day how bad the game is but Ubisoft trick us big time and I'm sure those who actually went to Paris to try the game first knew the game would be shi*. Still, they voice they concern to make the game or game modes like previous GR but Ubi still didn't listen. Now with year 2 they said they doing community request. Listen, don't buy into the BS anymore guys. I wouldn't be surprise they do Splinter Cell the same with its multiplayer. Hopefully the Division don't meet the same fate because seeing how PvP has been on GRW and FarCry5 it really sucks. The only good PvP I seen Ubisoft did so far as the latest was RB6 Siege and The Division despite the spongy nonsense but it had some diverse PvP modes. Modes based on elimination and objective base team points.

[Kean_1]

I wouldn't say they waste money. For one thing Ubisoft used an annoying business strategy to announce that 4v4 PvP(Ghost War) will be coming a few days before the actual game launched. They literally sold alot of players including myself thinking PvP is right around the corner but didn't have any ideal it will take 6 months to release let alone a 4 month beta test to be released after. So this tactic they used had grw #1 game seller in the first few months. During this time, those who like PvE DLC actually purchased the season pass and didn't know anything about Narco Road being a huge upset to most and fallen ghost which was the only good add on for this game. Worst, when PvP did came out, we didn't expect all the classes, thermal, limited weapons, no weapon customization/ loadout the campaign has, and much more.

So I can talk all day how bad the game is but Ubisoft trick us big time and I'm sure those who actually went to Paris to try the game first knew the game would be shi*. Still, they voice they concern to make the game or game modes like previous GR but Ubi still didn't listen. Now with year 2 they said they doing community request. Listen, don't buy into the BS anymore guys. I wouldn't be surprise they do Splinter Cell the same with its multiplayer. Hopefully the Division don't meet the same fate because seeing how PvP has been on GRW and FarCry5 it really sucks. The only good PvP I seen Ubisoft did so far as the latest was RB6 Siege and The Division despite the spongy nonsense but it had some diverse PvP modes. Modes based on elimination and objective base team points.

The biggest disappointment for me was obviously that GW only had one playstyle mode with no hardcore option that folks like me were asking for. Beyond that however was the puzzling departure from the core vision of GRW.......freedom. Freedom to choose from a wide variety of customizable weapons, freedom to choose your difficulty, freedom to make your gameplay experience about as casual or hardcore as you wanted........freedom to play the way you wanted to play.

GRW was also very unforgiving on higher difficulties due to its more "realistic" damage model. ......another quality that really attracted me to this game.

Once I saw that they were going the usual route of other popular PvP titles with classes, special abilities, spongy damage model, etc., I still hoped that there would at least be options or a mode that would tone most of these elements down, but that never happened.

....but somehow GW still has that core gameplay formula, feel and core spark that I know would make a great alternate (call it hardcore) experience. However, it seems I will never get to see that potential unlocked.

Ubi made a firm decision to take GW in one narrow, focused direction and I'm afraid there is nothing that is going to change that. You either like what they give you, muddle through it or move on. ....no choices, no options. At least that's the way I feel about it.

[xxFratosxx]

The biggest disappointment for me was obviously that GW only had one playstyle mode with no hardcore option that folks like me were asking for. Beyond that however was the puzzling departure from the core vision of GRW.......freedom. Freedom to choose from a wide variety of customizable weapons, freedom to choose your difficulty, freedom to make your gameplay experience about as casual or hardcore as you wanted........freedom to play the way you wanted to play.

GRW was also very unforgiving on higher difficulties due to its more "realistic" damage model. ......another quality that really attracted me to this game.

Once I saw that they were going the usual route of other popular PvP titles with classes, special abilities, spongy damage model, etc., I still hoped that there would at least be options or a mode that would tone most of these elements down, but that never happened.

....but somehow GW still has that core gameplay formula, feel and core spark that I know would make a great alternate (call it hardcore) experience. However, it seems I will never get to see that potential unlocked.

Ubi made a firm decision to take GW in one narrow, focused direction and I'm afraid there is nothing that is going to change that. You either like what they give you, muddle through it or move on. ....no choices, no options. At least that's the way I feel about it.

My theory was Ghost War was going to bring over the same character you created in the campaign. If they kept it that way by bringing over your load out and let you use 1 set of gadgets per round it would be good. Obviously this wasn't the case.

[Kean_1]

My theory was Ghost War was going to bring over the same character you created in the campaign. If they kept it that way by bringing over your load out and let you use 1 set of gadgets per round it would be good. Obviously this wasn't the case.

Anything that would have tied it more into the core gameplay / mechanics of GRW would have been nice IMO.

[fastastoast]

So true, I've got 3 mates casually still playing campaign. With lots of messing about, it's fun to drop in with them sometimes. But my god! It's so easy. Everything u shoot at is hit and killed. No drones marking you so stealth works. Etc etc. Pve, Great game. Pvp, good game (but addictive)

[wildbill3369]

I gave up a while ago. I had wished they let me choose my own loadout also wish they had offer more options like 8v8 or 12vs 12