Junior Member
Hey guys, I am new here and I have never played a Tom Clancy game before let alone a Ghost Recon. I must say I am quite intrigued by Wildlands and the depth of the game, it looks really cool and a lot of fun. My only gripe with the game is not on the game persay but the plot and story, which is like every Tom Clancy game where America intervenes in other countries with the Ghosts.
I for one do not agree with a lot of the US military actions towards other countries especially in Latin America and elsewhere, and that's why picking up this game is hard. I know that politics should not be a bear over me buying/not buying this game but it is tough.
I do have some questions though. Are these interventions in the plot of the game solely on saving people from bad dudes terrorizing the country? Do the"Ghosts" do bad things?
Should I buy this game lol?
Member
As someone who's recently been studying latin american history I think they definitely tip their hats to this exact point with the last mission, not to spoil anything. They definitely address this exact idea, which after studying LA history I gained a really great appreciation for this bit of storytelling. Having said that they do maintain a sort of "savior" complex without going into the complexities of the repercussions of intervention, like per say killing civilians and having if become significantly harder or even go into it really. They really portray the rebels as almost comical and incompetent. It's not something I'm saying is good or bad, I mean hey it's a video game, but I think it works in the idea more than most other shooting games.
Senior Member
. Are these interventions in the plot of the game solely on saving people from bad dudes terrorizing the country? No.
Do the"Ghosts" do bad things? Obviously no.
Splinter Cell and Ghost Recon are Tom Clancy franchises that almost all the time shows you how US sends people to other countries to save the day, you can even see a huge dilemma on Splinter Cell Blacklist.
You may have a problem with this type of actions and is understandable but neither Splinter Cell or Ghost Recon offend the countries they take place at in any way if anything it shows the reality of the situations which at the end may offend those countries but is unavoidable.
Ghost Recon Wildlands portrays in this case the Bolivian government making agreements with a drug cartel, which is something that actually happens in real life (maybe not in Bolivia because I do not know but it does in Mexico). Even the Mexican voice actors for the game took the theme very seriously (in a good way) because the game shows something that is real.
I live in Ciudad Juarez, meaning that I live on Mexico, so I know what I’m talking about. GRAW 2 takes place at Ciudad Juarez, the governor of Chihuahua, ended up giving a huge ban to the game (useless because it was still available to buy lol even to date) because it showed to much violence and gave a wrong image to Ciudad Juarez, which is ironic because if you care to do some research the city was at the time one of the most violent, Ciudad Juarez had already a bad image, it didn’t need help lol
Anyway what I want you to understand by this is that you shouldn’t care, I didn’t care and GRAW 2 took place at the city I live at, so you shouldn’t either. Enjoy the game and if you want to talk about politics i am here.
Junior Member
Cool. So just to be clear the Ghosts are not going around committing acts of terror, etc. killing innocents? Any acts of savior in the game, from missions, etc.?Originally Posted by LoneSpymaster Go to original post
Senior Member
There is no 'savior' complex. The Ghosts are not on a humanitarian mission. They are on a revenge mission to assassinate the leader of the SB Cartel. The game makes it explicitly clear via in-game dialogue that the 4 man team is in-country only to kill a guy...and it never minces it's words.
Why? Because the Santa Blanca Cartel brutally tortured and killed an American undercover DEA agent. That **** don't fly.
Yes, you do indeed do stuff in-game that is typically "Good guy" stuff....like terrorizing SBC goons, killing Cartel leaders etc. but everything is aimed towards getting access to the Cartel boss - El Sueno
And yes, the game does shed a LOT of light on Cartel atrocities...but it doesn't come off as cartoonish...it's based on real world incidents.
The game doesn't wax poetic about the heroic mission and it often paints the Americans as cold, detached professionals - which it gets points for in my book. It's rather well balanced.
So if you're worried that the game is entirely about Team America saving Bolivians from the evil Cartel...don't be.
Member
You read into that to much, I referred specifically to the rebels when I said the depiction as incompetent. As for DEA agent sandoval, he was a terrorist. But I will stand behind the savior complex thing, I find the same issue "the great wall" with Damon, in comes a group of Americans who a much more competent and capable who help a bunch of foolish rebels who can't do jack ****. Again, as I said the ending did acknowledge that, which I thought was a really well written ending, but should have been a more central theme in my mind. We don't really see the rebels doing a lot at all as far as stopping the cartel besides being called in.Originally Posted by shobhit7777777 Go to original post
Senior Member
If you are going to pick and choose which tactical shooters you play, based mainly on your personal political views, then your not going to be gaming very often. Every game has bad guys, and providing that the game isn't set as part of an alien invasion, those bad guys are mot likely going to invole foreign countries, or terrorist groups. So whether it take place in a foreign country, Afghanistan, Bolivia, Russia, to name a few, or involve other countries invading the US, such as North Korea in Homefront, or Russia in one of the COD games.
Junior Member
Banned
I think they handle the dialog and story scenarios pretty well. They don't make the ghosts look like saints, and there's even a bit of controversy at the end that will make you see they have no intention of claiming the Americans always do right. Even that they do in such a way as to not villainize, but rather to show now matter how good your intentions, bad actions will get you killed. And beyond that they do as well show corruption at the political end.
My favorite character is actually Karen Bowman. She has great interrogation dialog, and she is pretty funny at times. The more you take down baddies, the more the rebels will praise you, but when you see what the enemies are doing in this game, I don't think you'll have a problem with it. Throughout they make it clear it's not Bolivian citizens committing these crimes, it's greedy people whom take advantage of them.
Senior Member
I wasn't replying to you.Originally Posted by crowlecj Go to original post
As for the depiction of the rebels. Gameplay wise, they are far from incompetent. They have high HP and can pack a lot of firepower. Narrative-wise, I don't really ever see them do anything outright stupid (I haven't finished the game yet...Sueno still lives)....besides the game kind of makes it evident that between the UNIDAD and the SBC, the rebels are on their last breath. In fact, in Itacua one of your teammate comments on the lengths to which the SBC goes to protect themselves from the Rebels....sniping and IEDs....indicating that even though that they are the underdogs, they are still very operational.
Furthermore, it's a Ghost Recon game about a 4 man squad sent in two assassinate a Cartel boss. It's centered around the Ghosts, it's their story. The game does an ok job of indicating that the Rebels are kicking *** and it can be argued that a few more cutscenes or missions where you actually partake in Rebel led ops (and not use them as dispensable guns for hire) might have been nice...but perhaps given the limited timelimits and resources of the dev team, they chose to focus on the more important elements.
Lastly, Yes....the Americans ARE far more competent and capable than ex-farmer guerrillas. This is not BS "Saviour Complex" it is fact grounded in reality and history. I feel your perception may be coloured because you are LOOKING for a frame for 'Saviour Complex'....when the fact of the matter is, whether you like it or not.
Expecting anything else would be, IMO, SJW pandering and oblivious to ground realities.
