WHY I still play GR:W : Do You Role Play? | Forums

[LaMOi]

GR:W for me has evolved and morphed into something more than I originally expected and something I feel quite special.
To this day GR:W remains the most played game I have....

There are various reasons for this. One being is the game offers a degree of flexibility you rarely see.
The games design is flexible enough to allow the player to play the way they want and essentially create their own unique experience with few restrictions.

The game has had some great longevity in the gameplay department due to being one of the least linear open world games I’ve played.
Most missions can be approached in a myriad of different ways. The level design is generally fantastic, and the different biomes add a wonderful diversity to the locations.

But where the game truly begins to morph into something deeper is it’s Customisation. Customising your character and weapons gives the player a way to begin to create their own unique scenarios and characters within the world.

I mean, I know some of you will scoff at what I’m about to say — but sometimes I don’t always play GR as a straight military sim. I don’t always design solely spec ops type characters.
I have different characters that create different scenarios.

For example, one of my characters is a grizzled veteran, with a white beard. His wife was killed by the Cartel and he wants revenge. He looks like a lumberjack, he has a uses retro weaponry.
Think Collateral damage with Arnold Schwarzenegger, that was the kind of scenario I was going for. Not that I’ve seen the film all the way through.

One of my characters is a female Rebel Sniper. I play using typical Russian weapons. I also utilise the Rebels exclusively and don’t play with the Team AI.

Of course I have my straight Spec Ops characters as well....

You see some years ago Volition misunderstood I believe what the Special Sauce in the Saints Row franchise was. They thought after SR2, that the goofy silliness was what made the game unique, what set it apart. Therefore we got a big purple ***** to hit people with in SR3.
I feel they missed what made that game unique. What made SR2 distinctive, was it’s deep character customisation allowing players to create all kinds of characters to play with in that open world. It was one of the few games that you could do that at the time (on console at least).

Because of the deep customisation I do believe Wildlands transcends the GR brand, but I mean that in a good way.

* please don’t mistake what I’m saying, however, I don’t want ghost recon games to become less ghost recon. In fact I would rather future games become more realistic, especially in contrast with the recent red dead redemption, which seem to double down on realism and immersion to great effect.
Ghost recon brand could learn a lot from that game. Certainly with regards to having a committed vision for the game. And not worrying about servicing casual gamers.
Having the balls to make your game more hard-core, and follow through on that.

[Hugo-FOU]

Can’t disagree with anything you say, but another thing that makes GR:W so special is the fact that a casual gamer could pick it up, whack it on arcade and have a blast. Then someone like yourself can delve into it to a much deeper level.
I love the character customisation and I’m really hoping we can pick our teams loadouts at some point too.

[Ghost-Ami]

I agree and would love to see Ubi lean into RPG elements in future.

A Bioware style dialogue wheel that allows us to choose paths through conversations would be welcome. Also the ability as also seen in Bioware games to make personal lore choices about our characters so that NPCs will speak to them and treat them differently based on what we choose, referencing things about us or our backgrounds or whatever.

I doubt we'll see it. Ubi haven't really ever attempted anything on the narrative scale of a Bioware or Bethesda game, and it takes a whole different writing mindset and skillset to be able to create a game with diverse narrative paths and meaningful character choices that aren't just in the players' heads but are actually manifested in the game.

But if Ubi can surprise me I'll be happy to be surprised. And Wildlands is certainly already much more highly evolved than past Ubi offerings I'm familiar with.

[Virtual-Chris]

That's awesome to hear. I also do some fairly non-typical role-playing made possible by some of the customization.

For example, in my Ghost Mode play through, the Sniper guy in the squad was a native hunter/tracker who was assisting us. I used the tracker outfit, face paint, etc for him and the Alice harness as he was more Rebel than operator. As a result, one of our side missions was to assist, free or rescue locals. Some of those scenarios I made up but there’s enough Rebels in cages to easily support this.

In my lone wolf play through, I did something very similar to you... my character was a former cartel member in Mexico when Sueño, Muro and Plaga were there and they betrayed him and killed his family and left him for dead. Now he’s in Bolivia to get revenge. He wears a skull belclava, wears only black, and uses different weapons than a Tier-1 operator would (e.g Stoner LMG). He goes in loud and just causes havoc because he has nothing to lose. He doesn’t know how to fly a helo and doesn’t have a drone nor Rebel support. He travels exclusively by motorbike.

One other role I’ve been considering is a Unidad squad or Extranjeros squad (as in Fallen Ghosts).

Another one DarkDally featured in a video that I thought was great is a Rebel Guerrilla who utilizes all kinds of unconventional warfare techniques - mostly just causing grief for the Cartel. It was brilliant.

The possibilities are limitless.

It’s great to hear others ideas.

[Virtual-Chris]

I agree and would love to see Ubi lean into RPG elements in future.

A Bioware style dialogue wheel that allows us to choose paths through conversations would be welcome. Also the ability as also seen in Bioware games to make personal lore choices about our characters so that NPCs will speak to them and treat them differently based on what we choose, referencing things about us or our backgrounds or whatever.

I doubt we'll see it. Ubi haven't really ever attempted anything on the narrative scale of a Bioware or Bethesda game, and it takes a whole different writing mindset and skillset to be able to create a game with diverse narrative paths and meaningful character choices that aren't just in the players' heads but are actually manifested in the game.

But if Ubi can surprise me I'll be happy to be surprised. And Wildlands is certainly already much more highly evolved than past Ubi offerings I'm familiar with.

I haven’t played any Bioware games, so I maybe off base, but i think you may be wishing for more immersion rather than role-playing flexibility? Hear me out... the thing is, I’m not sure more dialog helps with role playing or hinders it. For example, with my lone wolf former Cartel member character, I have to treat all of Bowman’s briefings, dialogue, etc as voices in my character’s head because he’s not working with anyone, especially the CIA. One of the great things about Wildlands from a role playing flexibility perspective is that the story is thin and easily ignored allowing you to make your own circumstances and imagine you’re in a different situation without being constantly brought back to the games pre-packaged narrative. But this flexibility comes at the expense of immersion which is what I think you’re looking for. I could be wrong... if so, my apologies. It’s a great discussion.

[Ghost-Ami]

I haven’t played any Bioware games, so I maybe off base, but i think you may be wishing for more immersion rather than role-playing flexibility? Hear me out... the thing is, I’m not sure more dialog helps with role playing or hinders it. For example, with my lone wolf former Cartel member character, I have to treat all of Bowman’s briefings, dialogue, etc as voices in my character’s head because he’s not working with anyone, especially the CIA. One of the great things about Wildlands from a role playing flexibility perspective is that the story is thin and easily ignored allowing you to make your own circumstances and imagine you’re in a different situation without being constantly brought back to the games pre-packaged narrative. But this flexibility comes at the expense of immersion which is what I think you’re looking for. I could be wrong... if so, my apologies. It’s a great discussion.

Well, I think I get what you're saying. You value your headcanon. So do I. And one of the things I esteem most in a computer game is when the devs allow me to manifest my headcanon because...like...they thought of that, and there are options that allow you to make your character literally be and speak as and act as the sort of person you see in your head.

The ways you describe your rebel or lonewolf Nomads are exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. In a Bioware game there are usually a selection of backstories for your character. Typically three or four, but there's no reason there couldn't be more, There's usually a sort of vanilla default option---like a male paragon Commander Shepard or a female Dalish elf Warden or whatever---and if you don't play earlier games in the series and import saves there's a semicanon worldstate that will reflect that, but you have a variety of options for choosing both your character's history and their actions in game, and if you do play all the titles and import your choices or use a savegame editor you can craft a worldstate that won't be like any other player's.

So to use Wildlands as an example the Nomad Ubi came up with, the decorated Special Forces major with a backstory as described in a novel or two and some promotional material, that would be just the beginning in my ideal RPGification of the game.

Imagine you create your character when you start a new game, selecting their various physical attributes and clothes. You confirm those and are then given a choice between, oh, half a dozen backstories or more that try to cover as many bases as possible. An Alejandro Gillick style dark avenger is one. Perhaps a ruthless foreign mercenary is another. Perhaps a bookish civilian intelligence officer. Perhaps a local rebel fighting to save their country from capitalists and criminals.

You choose your character's voice from among options. Not just two for male and female. But four. Or sixteen. Different voice actors, different accents.

Once you begin playing the game you'll immediately notice that Bowman talks to you differently. If you're a fellow CIA agent she's collegial. If you're a vengeful criminal or merc she holds her nose and uses you to get the job done. If you're a rebel she is helpful but perhaps a bit skeptical or patronising.

Maybe you don't meet Bowman at all. Maybe the background story you choose has you getting into a country a completely different way. Maybe you're already in country. Maybe your handler is an Unidad officer or rebel leader. Maybe you don't have a handler.

Maybe you're virtuous and merciful. Maybe you murder everyone. Maybe you tell a story of rebels and win the game with little or no US involvement. Maybe you turn cartel bosses against each other. Maybe you play to take the whole cartel for yourself. Maybe the cartel wins despite or because of your efforts.

These sorts of elements are far more common in Bioware and Bethesda games. You choose who you are, you choose who your allies are, you choose who your enemies are, you choose how you win the game, and the game supports and manifests the role you craft every step of the way. Doors are opened or closed, characters treat you differently, you get certain advantages or disadvantages based on who you are and what you do.

There's always some sort of main questline so that the games have some sort of structure, but usually even that has many paths, and if you choose to ignore it there's still plenty to do.

And, hey, for the filthy casuals who just want to be told a story rather than picking their own path just put the game in "story mode", and all cutscenes just roll straight through automatically picking the options in the aforementioned default semicanon. XD

I reiterate that I don't think that Ubi will ever do this, but the series could really benefit from it. Ubi bring a lot to the table in terms of openworld freedom and mechanical/technical polish (bugs notwithstanding), but RPG level narrative excellence that can actually show players the myriad stories in their heads is something they'd have to learn.

So many efforts. XD

[Virtual-Chris]

Wow. Ok I had no idea that stuff was possible. That both supports role playing flexibility or head-canon as you say while also being more immersive. I agree it’s unlikely Ubisoft would ever implement something like this based on their style so far.

[LaMOi]

When you mention RPG mechanics — that’s quite a broad thing.


Personally, I definitely don’t want to turn GR into an RPG. I mean Ubisoft seem to starting to use levelled enemies and level gating nonsense in a lot more of their games!
Not every game needs that. I definitely do t want GR to turn into the Division with bullet sponge enemy’s that take multiple headshots and numbers pinging off their heads...

Also I’m not entirely sure what dialog options would bring to a game like this and I think it would confuse the vision of the game. This is after all meant to be a tactical shooter.

Having a focused vision for a game is important, as you have a set budget and resources to develop it. Therefore you don’t want to waste it on trying to incorporate too many things.

I would want them to develop what they have. Add more features and greater realism.
Things like carry weight, the gear you take has greater impact on gameplay, scuba equipment. etc

And it would be good if they could develop how missions interlinked, and your actions in one province had consequences. If you take out a boss in charge of say security, it meant that it lowered the combat effectiveness of regular troops in other provinces. Or a Boss that dealt with production, taking him out would mean less money, and therefore enemies would have inferior equipment.
Taking out helipads in Unidad bases would mean less combat ready helicopters and would reduce the frequency with which they could use them etc. Stuff like this.

[LaMOi]

I haven’t played any Bioware games, so I maybe off base, but i think you may be wishing for more immersion rather than role-playing flexibility? Hear me out... the thing is, I’m not sure more dialog helps with role playing or hinders it. For example, with my lone wolf former Cartel member character, I have to treat all of Bowman’s briefings, dialogue, etc as voices in my character’s head because he’s not working with anyone, especially the CIA. One of the great things about Wildlands from a role playing flexibility perspective is that the story is thin and easily ignored allowing you to make your own circumstances and imagine you’re in a different situation without being constantly brought back to the games pre-packaged narrative. But this flexibility comes at the expense of immersion which is what I think you’re looking for. I could be wrong... if so, my apologies. It’s a great discussion.

Agreed. The narrative is kind of background, so you can spin your own narrative.

I also did a Native American / tracker type character with a Mohawk and tracker pants.. Using the old fashioned musket, and crossbow.

[AI BLUEFOX]

I think it's brilliant that you're getting so much out of the game, LaMOi.

Whilst I have a personal preference for the classic GR, tactical game, I'm not one of those who has a puritanical view that the game is somehow diluted if other game styles are also possible. I can't stop playing Wildlands and probably won't until the next GR comes out.