Remove Devision Type Gameplay Mechanics and Features from Ghost Recon. | Forums

[DanHibikiFanXM]

Agreed, but they should still be made to understand that we do not want these changes.

Agreed.

[B_616e6f6e]

Just don't buy the game. They'll get the message.

This. Even just waiting for the first sale helps.

[FerroMortem]

This. Even just waiting for the first sale helps.

I believe in voting with your dollars and is why I don't pay for microtransactions in GRW but with how this game is being mass marketed to a different audience I think a boycott from fans of what ghost recon was and is meant to be will be a drop in the bucket as far as the sale numbers. Not saying it's not worth doing but I doubt we will make enough of a difference financially speaking as they are targeting a much wider audience with the move to RPG and Sci-fi aspects.

[MKINGER]

AGREE.

- NO TO CLASSES, PERIOD. You're not letting me play they way I want to play if I'm forced into a class. Tier 1 can snipe just as well as they can assault.
- Add back the AI teammates and refine them. Allow them to drive vehicles/aircraft to locations for solo play.
- Add fast roping from heli's.
- It's cosmetic but have Night vision goggles down when in use and up when not in use. Remove eyewear when in use. Will ballcaps they should have a harness system and turn the hat around.

[ES-Ulukai]

I agree with some of the things that was said but I'll wait for E3 for more clarifications about those changes from the devs.

@MKINGER, you're against classes but for me it depends on how they work, classes doesn't change a thing for GRB because classes are parts of brand since GR1 !
Assault, Support, Demo and sniper distributed like you wanted in 3 teams "Alpha, bravo & charlie".

[Pops_5116]

I agree with some of the things that was said but I'll wait for E3 for more clarifications about those changes from the devs.

@MKINGER, you're against classes but for me it depends on how they work, classes doesn't change a thing for GRB because classes are parts of brand since GR1 !
Assault, Support, Demo and sniper distributed like you wanted in 3 teams "Alpha, bravo & charlie".

Classes were in the older GR games but you also had team AI to fill different roles. Playing GRB solo, you won’t have AI to fill other roles. That’s a big part of the problem

[DanHibikiFanXM]

In terms of classes, I feel like it should be done like it was in GRAW/GRAW2. You could pick a specific class (rifleman, grenadier, automatic rifleman, marksman) that would give special bonuses (increased ammo count, accuracy, etc.) when using the appropriate weapon, but you could use whatever weapons you wanted. Hosts could also turn those advantages off if they so chose.

Classes work fine when playing with others, but could cause frustration when playing solo as others have pointed out.

[Robin__070]

+1

[FerroMortem]

In terms of classes, I feel like it should be done like it was in GRAW/GRAW2. You could pick a specific class (rifleman, grenadier, automatic rifleman, marksman) that would give special bonuses (increased ammo count, accuracy, etc.) when using the appropriate weapon, but you could use whatever weapons you wanted. Hosts could also turn those advantages off if they so chose.

Classes work fine when playing with others, but could cause frustration when playing solo as others have pointed out.

Agree something like that would be preferable to the fictional limitations on basic skills and gear that is currently being shown.

[LaMOi]

Decided my first post here in awhile should be to reply to this.

I've got a powerhouse rig, part of a big clan of good people, and I have a reliable internet connection. But I remember the days when none of that was true. And I remember when the idea of a required internet connection started and I just got really out of gaming for awhile. I had the income to get the games, I had the drive, I wanted to play these games. But the locations where I were living in that period of time meant that I wasn't going to get to play them. I kept playing single player games, and I went back and would play the older ones I had really enjoyed. I was really disappointed because through no fault of my own, I couldn't get reliable internet.. and the companies were acting like everyone was living next door to a server node.

I never bought those games. I never much enjoyed them when I'd see them played or try them. Mostly because they all seemed to be forcing people to play together, either with coop or PvP.

I've been playing games online since 1992/93. I remember and Kali and Kahn were a gamer's dream. I played PvP for the better part of a decade, back when it was first called H2H (Head to Head). I no longer care for it, especially with the immaturity granted by broadband and the proliferation of griefers - the latter of which no game company seems interested in actually doing anything about. I do play coop in particular games and genres. This is not one. If I want to play coop, I'll boot up TD2 or DCS and go splash some MiGs when I have hours to plunk down for coop.

I play single player games because I am busy as hell with a real life. I can boot up a game, play for 20 minutes and enjoy it by myself, without pissing off a partner who left their own game to come play mine so I can only play for ten minutes because it took me ten minutes to find someone to play with so I can enjoy it. ..See how that prior sentence feels like a ridiculous run-on to get to a point? Reading that? That's how forced online feels to me.

Ubisoft.. don't do this. Please.

The primary audience that you all are vying towards is no longer college students and kids. Or even people in their early twenties so much. Your long term customers work 40+ hours a week, have families, have obligations, and don't need or want the hassle of trying to log into a game where they have to matchmake to enjoy the game.

This is exactly the kind of crap I’m talking about.....


Why are not more folks seeing the implications of ALWAYS ONLINE ?

It benefits no one but the publisher....