PC Games interview with Q&A illustrates the level of disconnect. | Forums

[AI BLUEFOX]

Another fun game, perhaps habit forming even... another failed potential to make this the sequel to OGR.

I know Blue, wait for the game to come out to start the blame and the negativity, right?

I thought that I was amongst the few Dinosaurs that like to play Solo but I can see plenty of them out, at least here. Not that they care because again, the Masses and the Casual have already come and come hard with the first fake and gimmicky trailer. Imagine what will happen when they start to hype this massively.

How is this still Ghost Recon as its core?????

Good idea that. Actually play the game.

[FerroMortem]

It's entirely possible to judge the game based on what has been presented thus far, plenty of concrete information to base an opinion off of.

[AI BLUEFOX]

It's entirely possible to judge the game based on what has been presented thus far, plenty of concrete information to base an opinion off of.

There are many elements that make up how you feel in a game and how the game feels. The audio sounded, better, the player character movement feels better according to one YouTuber who has played it, the weapon ballistics seemed to have improved, we have wire cutters and wounding etc.

There was plenty more information about Wildland including real game play footage from multiple sources, yet there was still a difference in the expectation and reality. Chopper control and dynamics, the way the AI were managed and behaved the overall feel of the game were only apparent, as with most games, when you actually played it. These issues, however, didn't define Wildlands, it was more than a casual game and very worthy of the GR franchise, fitting far better than the previous 3 releases in my view.

Neither of the two main issues, online only and no team AI, will effect me much at all, (I am supportive of those who are effected) but I don't think I can really judge the game until I've played it.

[GAP_Computer]

but I don't think I can really judge the game until I've played it.

agree,You Can't Judge a Book By the Cover

[Copperhead_SG]

In AC Odyssey, it is impossible to kill an enemy with a single arrow shot to the head without a sufficiently high accumulated character skill level and a bow dealing enough damage to register as an instakill.

That's mixing the authenticity of historical setting in ancient Greece with the power play gamer fantasy of XP and loot grind.

It would appear to be the similar case for GR Breakpoint.

No hardened long-time GR fan would want to be able to kill a high level enemy archetype with a single headshot, ONLY AFTER LEVELING UP WITH AN APPROPRIATE CLASS AND A WEAPON WITH HIGH ENOUGH DMG VALUE TO MATCH.

When a GR fan fires at the enemy accurately and if the head is unprotected, the NPC dies. Pure and simple. The player doesn't have to ask the game for permission first to register it as a kill. If the game has to roll a dice or look up the stats table to make a decision, then it has no place in a realistic tactical shooter.

[Copperhead_SG]

It is reasonable to expect level gating on the island to be in full effect.

If you venture out into the parts of the open world that are well above your class skill and/or weapon level, get ready to die.

[Spitfirex007]

This is Ghost Recon at it's core?!? I think I literally laughed my *** off. Ghost Recon at it's core is about selecting your weapons/classes at the start of a mission. Loading out your squad and taking out the enemy as a spec ops unit.

This game has you looting weapons, going lone wolf and fighting a army of elite soldiers. Are these developers honestly that clueless? This game is nothing like Ghost Recon. Not even a little bit. .

[FerroMortem]

There are many elements that make up how you feel in a game and how the game feels. The audio sounded, better, the player character movement feels better according to one YouTuber who has played it, the weapon ballistics seemed to have improved, we have wire cutters and wounding etc.

There was plenty more information about Wildland including real game play footage from multiple sources, yet there was still a difference in the expectation and reality. Chopper control and dynamics, the way the AI were managed and behaved the overall feel of the game were only apparent, as with most games, when you actually played it. These issues, however, didn't define Wildlands, it was more than a casual game and very worthy of the GR franchise, fitting far better than the previous 3 releases in my view.

Neither of the two main issues, online only and no team AI, will effect me much at all, (I am supportive of those who are effected) but I don't think I can really judge the game until I've played it.

That's you, not me and the issues I am basing my judgment off isn't just limited to either of those things while I do think both are terrible choices.

I don't like having a fictional location that leaves much to be desired in its portrayal lending to believability as it's not grounded despite having some real-world reference.
I don't like the overtly Sci-Fi theme or story.
I don't like the Cartoonish Enemy models and types that lack any believability whatsoever and are nothing more than standard video game tropes like a guy in a bulky bomb suit with a minigun.
I don't like Having to fight drones.
I don't like overtly sci-fi tech that isn't that grounded like the drones shown.
I don't like fake military vehicles and would prefer real ones or ones based closely off of them.
I don't like classes being made up by developers I would prefer no classes if they aren't going to have their military advisor have them based on real-world tier 1 Unit's loadout's within a fireteam not arbitrary cliche video game classes, having a machine gunner carry an AT weapon is absurd and a gigantic turnoff for those who appreciate how much an MG and it's ammo sucks to carry let alone in addition to a Carl Gustof and it's munitions on top of that.
I don't like tiered loot, I find tiered loot one of my least favorite things ever implemented into shooters.
I don't like tiered enemies.
I don't like always online.
I don't like the lack of AI Teammates.
I don't like the lack of authenticity throughout.
I don't like unrealistic crafting.
I don't like the division or ghost recon adding a number of major aforementioned gameplay mechanics from it.
I don't like Raids or MMO end game gimmicks I like proper story DLC.

The game is 5 months away with a working gameplay demo its fair to judge the information that has been shown in the reveal and by the press who have played the game it and it isn't necessary to have played the game to know I don't like any or all of the things I have mentioned. Some could be changed but that isn't likely.

[FerroMortem]

agree,You Can't Judge a Book By the Cover

You can when it says science fiction on the cover and you don't like sci-fi.
...and nowhere have I said it isn't going to be a fun game I think it will be a fun and enjoyable game, but again I think it should be a new IP, not the next ghost recon.

[GAP_Computer]

You can when it says science fiction on the cover and you don't like sci-fi.
...and nowhere have I said it isn't going to be a fun game I think it will be a fun and enjoyable game, but again I think it should be a new IP, not the next ghost recon.

you still judging the game by is cover, maybe outside say SCF and inside is a Pinocchio story, but i get your point