1. #1

    Ghost Recon : Advanced Warfighter 3

    A new GR:AW game would be a real gift to a lot of gamers, and would give back to the franchise the tactical and smart playstyle GR really represents.

    This open world everywhere obsession has to STOP. Wildland is a great game, but it IS NOT a ghost recon. Don't tell us a franchise can fully change its spirit, because this is bull***t. The very concept of a franchise is to keep its concept and core gameplay among the titles, so we (the gamers, maybe you remember about us sometimes) can dream and enjoy this concept for years and years.
    And future soldierÖ I meanÖ this crap isnít even tactical. Itís a mistake, period. Online GRs where okay, but we are talking about singleplayer and COOP experience here.

    Let me summarise some thoughts about what Ghost Recon is to me : (I played all of them)


    GR is all about tactics. But in Ghost Recon Wildlands, there is no tactics. GR:W is about completing an objective, and there is no challenge, no traps to do so. Sometimes with an extra (donít be detected, donít kill, etcÖ) but... This is not tactics. Itís too open. Too much approach angles means no challenge.

    Advanced Warfighter games don't give a damn about these extras. Advanced Warfighter missions are puzzles, they are brain teasers ! Itís not really about being silent (even if this would have been a good extra ).
    Itís ALL ABOUT moving. Moving. Moving. and Moving. Itís about choosing which of the 3 or 4 streets leading to the drop point are the best deal considering enemy PLACEMENT, enemy MOVEMENTS, and shooting angles. Again, itís a brain teaser.
    And this, my friends, is ABSENT from Wildlands. This is because of this openworld hype, ruining the careful and accurate map design. Wanting to do big, but forgetting the details.

    MAPS :

    In GRAW, the maps are designed FOR a given mission, a given script. So the devs actively think about how to trap, ambush and surprise the gamers who want to play the game. This requires some real tactical thinking for you to be successful and beat the game.
    The GRAW maps are insanely rich in terms of hidden opportunities to express your tactical behavior and imagination. If you take time to analyze your environment, you will find the gifts given by the map designers, such as this discrete and narrow shooting angle you have to find, to take down the damn MG that pisses you off.
    But this requires real game development. Real thinking. We need a tactical shooter DESIGNED to challenge us, and it has to be SCRIPTED. A map for a mission. That's it. It has to be a big map, but to be rich and entertaining it has to be developed FOR the mission.


    Since the first Ghost Recon, we can assign waypoints and behavior to our ghosts. We need this back. End of the story. Why did that disappear ? Itís a major part of the tactical magic of Ghost Recon. Bring us back the map view and the individual crosscom.
    OhÖ and it has to be blue !

    Ubisoft, we need you to revive and bring us back Cpt Mitchell and his ghosts. Damn I want to go back and shoot those enemies when they reload their weapons. (yeah, donít make that mistake again ^^ ).

    Give us this :

    Ghost Recon : Advanced Warfighter 3
    Share this post

  2. #2

    Yeah I'm disappointed with where the GhostRecon series is heading. I'm replaying the games on Steam and found this video. I love how they explain the GhostRecon series in the first 50 seconds. I feel like they had a much better picture of what GhostRecon is about.
    Share this post

  3. #3
    I love you man! (I presume) Exactly what I was thinking. Started to play GRAW 1 again this weekend (WIn 10) and still finding it to be enjoyable where many others are not.
    Now, I only played the original and AW ones on PC. Never the console or others, because they did not seem to be designed for me. I experienced a kind of disconnect with the direction the series was taking. Too much running, too much hyping and made for people too young (with ADHD, which those games donīt help).

    This, in my opinion, is the reason: Ubisoft is running a business, so their decision making has to serve that and be believable in the conference room. They ask: can it make money? And the answer decides the fate of each proposition for a game. This is why every pop star sounds the same. They do what they think will sell. The best music is the one that is made not thinking about that, but about the quality of the experience of listening. Also, making a game where you just run like headless chicken is probably less labour-intensive, which justifies the release, because it is more likely to turn a profit with a smaller investment. This is also why many games these days are designed to hook you into staying and paying. But it is all on a superfiicial level without a script.

    So if they would make a sequel to these two, it would have to be cheap to make and be expected to produce income. In other words it is unlikely we will ever see a GRAW 3.

    The art has been taken over by business models, which want a quick explosion instead of a steady burn.

    Now that we are already past the predicted future of these games (2013-14), just for fun: What year would the 3 be predicting? Where would it take place? Would there be something about climate change in it? Perhaps other megatrends? Would it be bleak or colourful? Agree on the blue CCom!
    Also must be said, the music in these games is perhaps my favourite of all games. I would wish that for the 3 as well. Also R6 Lockdown and Vegases had excellent music. Good taste with movie soundtrack meets occasional metal. Nowadays they just make atonal sound design without actual composition, like in R6 Siege. I guess itīs difficult to make fresh sounds with the same 12 notes again and again. But maybe it is not necessary to reinvent the wheel every time?

    I also am interested in multiplayer and Co-op for the opportunity to test my tactical thinking with real people and learn from them. This should definitely be part of the GRAW 3 as well.
    So I too am hoping for a worthy sequel for the GRAWs, one that would continue that legacy with honour and thoughtfulness.
    Share this post

  4. #4

    Solar Power Systems in Perth WA

    Ghost Recon has been one of the most enjoyed games previously especially for pc gamers. I hope we soon get an updated version for both pc as well as gaming consoles.
    Share this post

  5. #5
    I agree that the open-world needs to go. It's one thing to have large levels with tons of angles from which to attack. It's a wrong thing to have an open-world. They tried it twice, and it's not Ghost Recon (twice.) However, it is possible to have tactical gameplay in an open-world; just look at Arma and such.
    The tactical map needs to come back (in order to fix the series.) It's weird that Ubi downgrades and removes key features.
    I'd rather Ghost Recon 3 than GRAW3. Though, I would want the improvements that the GRAWs added, namely, the quick commands for friendly bots. I'd still prefer a GRAW3 over another open-world GR game, though.
    Share this post

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Gonzo_850 Go to original post
    I love how they explain the GhostRecon series in the first 50 seconds. I feel like they had a much better picture of what GhostRecon is about.
    Their stated "core values of Ghost Recon":
    1- tactical gameplay and strategy in your actions (interactions?)
    2- managing your squad
    3- focus on realism and authenticity (in order to create a modern battlefield experience)
    4- amazing weaponry (bringing you all of the latest military gear)

    I think it's safe to say this is no longer the foundation they use (regardless of whether you think past games succeeded at it.)
    Share this post