[SUGGESTION] Do we want to play Super Mario World or a Clancy-game with tension? | Forums

[redsept]

- Lives matter in Mario World
- You can collect Life
- When you die but still have Life, enemy respawns, your progress retained for the time being, just like Campaign KIA
- When you run out of Lives, you are reset to point one - just like Ghost Mode

You got it correct.

1) Play Super Mario World with infinite lives like Wildlands normal campaign. I would say it's boring, Mario can't die for good, it's like a cheat is enabled.
2) Now try playing Super Mario World with one life like you play Ghost Mode. Did you try it? Not much fun, it slows things down and makes it too hard.

Are you starting to see how these small changes affect the whole mood of the game? They affect how you play the game. In example no. 1 death has no meaning, just checkpoint yourself back to the game with your character. Example no. 2 is for masochists, and that is what some could say about Ghost Mode. It's a step too far (although I do prefer it to the main campaign).

- Super Mario World is a mid 80 games coming from different genre and technical level.

Yes, and it still has more tension than Wildlands from 2017. Shame on Wildlands. If your character can't die in the main campaign mode, it takes away the tension. Your character will be alive in the end. That would be a big letdown in a Clancy book or a movie if you knew in the beginning that your ghost can't die for good. It actually is the same thing in Ghost Mode, if you reach the end, the same guy you started the campaign with will be there with you. No exceptions.

Ghost Recon Wildlands is 2017 game as a tactical shooter open world game where you play as a an specific agent called Nomad where death canonically does not happen and when player fails, it's disregarded with a soft replay or reset

That has already been discarded with the ability to remove the teammates in solo play. The story can be discarded in a permadeath game mode. This is not a problem of any kind. (Or call every ghost recruit Nomad, it can be their codename...)

- Both games are irrelevant

So why are you here on this forum telling how you don't want to see these games evolve??

- Your hope of having these kind of games growing should be placed in military simulation such as Arma

No Arma on consoles. And I still do not understand this opposition to having an OPTION in the game for this kind of a game mode which would be more meaningful than the main campaign and less irritating than the Ghost Mode. I truly do not understand the opposition. I don't.

It works great in Rogue Spear and State of Decay 2. I see no reason why it wouldn't work in Wildlands and make it an even better game for those who want a bigger challenge but not Ghost Mode style permadeath.

[Ghost-Ami]

Is this a bad time to mention that I prefer the sort of game where I can quicksave and quickload with no restriction?

I tend to find meaning in the creative content of games, the stories, the characters, the worlds.

Not so much in the risk of losing progress. That's all just silly and frustrating to me.

By being very careful I did get to level 30 and total cartel destabilisation in Ghost mode on extreme difficulty once without dying. But subsequently I have just ignored permadeath and unapologetically backed up and restored my savegames for any death. (I'm one of those people who likes the single primary and realistic reloading and such too much to go back to the vanilla campaign.)

I just want to get on with the business of playing the game's normal course. Doing the same parts over and over again, be it progressing the campaign or levelling up a character, is just annoying.

[redsept]

Is this a bad time to mention that I prefer the sort of game where I can quicksave and quickload with no restriction?

Go ahead. Although that has nothing to do with ghosts, they don't get a second chance when they die. Re-spawning and re-loading have always been there for FPS games, but there is another way. A better way in many respects, a way that could be implemented to Wildlands relatively easily. It would make the game much more dynamic and tense than in the normal campaign and much less frustrating than Ghost Mode.

I'm still hugely puzzled how almost no one else can see this being the most fun way to play Wildlands, as it would motivate the player to keep the ghosts alive and make the gameplay and strategies more dynamic, more varied. You never know when the game is going to change if there is the possibility of losing your ghost. The game becomes more unpredictable, more alive, you get a history for the past. Constant reloading erases most parts of the story.

But with permadeath the story goes on, uninterrupted. There is continuity, a complete story in the end. You could have a legacy map showing stats of dead ghosts and what areas they took over from the cartel.

I tend to find meaning in the creative content of games, the stories, the characters, the worlds.

Not so much in the risk of losing progress. That's all just silly and frustrating to me.

When a character dies in a Clancy book or movie, does the progress go somewhere? No, the death becomes a part of the story. If the hero dies, someone with probably less experience takes over. Death has meaning in real life, there are no respawning soldiers. Besides terminator, or course.

I just want to get on with the business of playing the game's normal course. Doing the same parts over and over again, be it progressing the campaign or levelling up a character, is just annoying.

If you die in Ghost Mode, you get to do it ALL AGAIN, that would include grinding back the weapons, attachments, resources, skill points and medals. My proposition would make it so lose ONLY skill points (and the character you've created). Weapons, attachments, resources, skill points and medals would be there, and fetching the gear from the fallen ghost would be a small mission in itself.

If you play the normal campaign, there is just one way to level up the character, no retries. And he becomes a supersoldier at level 30. No matter if he has died a million times, he will level up and never permanently die. You always know how the game will end. No variation, and character development is like a straight arrow, always getting more skill points and never taking any hits.

I can see why people like the infinite respawning but I still don't see any reason why anyone would resist this OPTION to have permadeath for the ghost.

[Ghost416]

What data are these graphs of yours derived from, anyway? Unless they're based on player data of some kind, they're utterly meaningless.

[Ghost-Ami]

Go ahead. Although that has nothing to do with ghosts, they don't get a second chance when they die. Re-spawning and re-loading have always been there for FPS games, but there is another way. A better way in many respects, a way that could be implemented to Wildlands relatively easily.

When a character dies in a Clancy book or movie, does the progress go somewhere? No, the death becomes a part of the story. If the hero dies, someone with probably less experience takes over. Death has meaning in real life, there are no respawning soldiers. Besides terminator, or course.

If you die in Ghost Mode, you get to do it ALL AGAIN, that would include grinding back the weapons, attachments, resources, skill points and medals. My proposition would make it so lose ONLY skill points (and the character you've created). Weapons, attachments, resources, skill points and medals would be there, and fetching the gear from the fallen ghost would be a small mission in itself.

If you play the normal campaign, there is just one way to level up the character, no retries. And he becomes a supersoldier at level 30. No matter if he has died a million times, he will level up and never permanently die. You always know how the game will end. No variation, and character development is like a straight arrow, always getting more skill points and never taking any hits.

I can see why people like the infinite respawning but I still don't see any reason why anyone would resist this OPTION to have permadeath for the ghost.

I'm certainly not opposed to what you want. Anything within reason that allows a player to enhance their experience of a game is all to the good. I'm just sharing some other thoughts on how I'd prefer the game to work.

And that is the crux of the matter really. There are bajillions of people who play or have played this game since launch a year and a half ago, and each one has their own idea about how to make the game better by their lights.

It's hard for a developer to address so many different visions of what the game should be coming from the playerbase, especially if many of them would require a significant technical overhaul. And the bar for "significant" is not very high around here given the limited resources Ubi have allotted to GRW right now.

At present we can't even get Ubi to fix simple bugs in meshes and animations and such, some of which have been longstanding issues. And not only did an update specifically purporting to address bugs miss so many, it also released new content with bugs of its own like the Ultimax 100 suppressor or the LVOA magazine.

I guess I'm just trying to say that management of expectations is called for. It's apparently not hard to be heard around here---the Ubi community managers are pretty good about taking note of and passing on bug reports and suggestions and such---but it is extremely hard to be heeded when what remaining devs still work on the game put together an update.

[redsept]

What data are these graphs of yours derived from, anyway? Unless they're based on player data of some kind, they're utterly meaningless.

I was trying to make a point how the permadeath affects the mood of the game. You invest more in a developed character that a rookie, you don't probably mind if the rookie dies compared to a level 20 ghost... That is what I mean with that graph, you could call it a kind of arc of the drama (with 3 deaths from start of the game to the end).

I hope you understand that it was just to visually make my point, I'm not saying they're scientific evidence or anything like that.


And I'm still puzzled why people attack against this idea so forcefully... Do you think that adding this option would hurt the game somehow? I'm truly puzzled. I thought Rogue Spear and State of Decay 2 are pretty loved games, the permadeath is an exellent thing in those games and would be fun. I'm truly puzzled why resisting adding this option is so common.

[redsept]

It's hard for a developer to address so many different visions of what the game should be coming from the playerbase, especially if many of them would require a significant technical overhaul. And the bar for "significant" is not very high around here given the limited resources Ubi have allotted to GRW right now.

They implemented Ghost Mode. Implementing permadeath for ghost would be less of a task, even as a barebone version. There would be almost no technical overhaul compared to some ideas. This would be relatively easily implemented and provide a totally new experience on how to play Wildlands. I see it as a win win.

Ubisoft will continue to update Wildlands for a long time, they've said it themselves. That is the reason why I don't share your pessimism.

[Ghost416]

I was trying to make a point how the permadeath affects the mood of the game. You invest more in a developed character that a rookie, you don't probably mind if the rookie dies compared to a level 20 ghost... That is what I mean with that graph, you could call it a kind of arc of the drama (with 3 deaths from start of the game to the end).

I hope you understand that it was just to visually make my point, I'm not saying they're scientific evidence or anything like that.


And I'm still puzzled why people attack against this idea so forcefully... Do you think that adding this option would hurt the game somehow? I'm truly puzzled. I thought Rogue Spear and State of Decay 2 are pretty loved games, the permadeath is an exellent thing in those games and would be fun. I'm truly puzzled why resisting adding this option is so common.

Well, then, since they aren't based on anything, they're effectively meaningless. I'm not trying to be demeaning or anything, but yeah. I can only speak for myself, but I don't find the thought of losing a high level character I've invested dozens of hours into in a game where all manner of bugs can get you killed to be very exciting. I actually find it rather tedious and rage inducing..

[Ghost-Ami]

They implemented Ghost Mode. Implementing permadeath for ghost would be less of a task, even as a barebone version. There would be almost no technical overhaul compared to some ideas. This would be relatively easily implemented and provide a totally new experience on how to play Wildlands. I see it as a win win.

Ubisoft will continue to update Wildlands for a long time, they've said it themselves. That is the reason why I don't share your pessimism.

Quite a few of us---including me---did suggest this sort of thing a couple of months ago when Ghost mode came out. I was one of the first to champion a "one Ghost dies, another takes their place, the war goes on" approach. Maybe they are considering it. Maybe not.

The lack of transparency is troubling. And you're right, they do throw us a bone sometimes. But I don't know what it takes to actually get something fixed or added. No one does. And that can be pretty depressing.

[redsept]

Well, I do think that an articulated and thoroughly discussed suggestion has a better way of going to get implemented. I hope.

This issue has always been the biggest thing in Wildlands that bugs me. You're in one of the most dangerous countries in the world. But you can't die.

Seriously, why? A tiny fix would solve this. And add so much to the gameplay. I'm truly astonished it has taken Ubisoft over a year and still no solution (other than Ghost Mode, which is flawed).