Great points. They have to do something about this drone situation. It is such a big part of this game but, it is/was a terrible idea. AI teammates should help but damn, the drone situation is depressing. Shout out to my AI DAWGS. We close......Originally Posted by Kean_1 Go to original post
Exactly, same here and I know there are some guys like Steven, Mike, Chris and others that do their own Roll Playing and enjoy this thoroughly and I am somehow envy of them but then again I think, if I have to make my own fun, what am I paying them for?Originally Posted by Kean_1 Go to original post
Again I agree, I love the shooting aspect of the shooter game, hence, why I only or mostly play shooters but even if the weapons look good but the shooting is lacking (bullet drop, draw distance, etc) then I am not enjoying the shooting part of the game, which again, it is the most important part of said shooter game. And if the second part is also bad or even worse (the AI, friendly or foe), then what do we have left in this shooter game? .Originally Posted by Kean_1 Go to original post
Looking L33t is of no importance to me because I don't roll play nor feel immersed in the game mostly because gear is not taken into consideration or matters in the gameplay.
This is where I disagree but not because I don't want the same thing but because it has not happened since GRFS for one reason or another, good reasons or bad, it simply has not happened.Originally Posted by Kean_1 Go to original post
GR needs to stand on its own Genre, make it smaller in terms of quantity but where the Quality will shine and I am sure Ubi will sell the same amount because the hardcore community will stand behind it. If they do that, I can almost guarantee everyone will forget the shafting they got from BP and will look forward to patronize them again.
And even that only goes so far ... when I see that freakin god da*n belt.Originally Posted by FCacGRdvWD Go to original post
I agree with pretty much everything you said so we're on the same page as far as bettering the actual game, maybe it's just that I've lost hope for this title and I'm just hoping they can direct all their resources towards the next game which hopefully will be mind blowing.Originally Posted by AI BLUEFOX Go to original post
At this point I feel like I have done everything that could be done to enjoy GRB but it stil feels terrible and I'm not sure the inclusion of the AI Team will be the redemption some are hoping for.
Hence why I err more on the side of "put a fork in it and start working on the next one".
Regarding the poster it was a collective effort but you're the one that made it come to life and handled the logistics so don't be afraid to take credit for this!
This, i have to agree -- every single word!Originally Posted by Virtual-Chris Go to original post
What they could do with the factions is:
-- Change Mads Schulz & Haruhi Ito into faction-merchants
-- Let them sell all the stuff usually coming with a Battle-pass
-- Every item they sell has a faction-value
-- Faction-missions give faction-points to buy stuff from the merchants
So they could add new stuff to the merchants, old stuff stays forever, so there is no pressure onto the players with daily logins and such. Everyone is able to play and get the faction-items whenever he/she wants. Old concept i know, but it would help. And yes there will be grind then, but a reason to play.
Best regards.
I don't think the game can turn around, but maybe the series itself can. That's a huge maybe though. In order to change Ghost Recon for the better we need to see big changes in Ubisoft. Their culture needs to improve first. Why is it that the game they want to make isn't on the same page as a game we would expect? This is a serious question as to why the people working on Ghost Recon need so much advice from their customers instead of already being in the same frame of mind as their customers. Instead of using our time to enjoy a Ghost Recon title, we spend that time working on a poster to communicate to the devs about what a Ghost Recon should be. They need to know the franchise and the audience so intrinsically that little to no course correction from the fan base is required.
I have no issues with a dev team that wants to make their own game, but if you want to make a Ghost Recon you should at least already know what makes a good Ghost Recon.
The one thing I love about SOCOM's creative director David Sears, is that he was sincerely passionate towards people who serve in the military and what they do. I've met him personally and while he is just a humble game developer with a pug and no military experience what so ever, he had the right frame of mind in making tactical shooter that reflected his admiration and respect to the military. He knew how to make fun and realism balanced without ever dreaming of taking SOCOM to the WTF level GR has reached.
At this point Ubisoft might be too big of a company to just make that kind of tactical shooter.
Unfortunately you can't have a big player like that not have its projects derailed by all sorts of BS marketing advisors and misguided focus groups trying to force the lastest trends upon it.
One can hope Breakpoint was a big learning experience but I don't have a lot of faith into huge companies (not just gaming ones), they always will revert back to their habits because it would require major cultural changes to have them realize they're doing it all wrong.
It's shocking to me that they don't realize that a good product will basically sell itself, especially in the gaming world where most of the promotion is word of mouth and also herd mentality.
Instead, they release a ****ty, unfinished product and waste millions of dollars on Lil' Wayne, Jon Bernthal, E3 presentations, commercials, etc... for what result? The product is still flawed and tanked so bad you had to restructure the company and make a fool of yourself during investors calls.
I'd love to see a studio like Ubisoft have a little internal revolution and start a new GR project with one simple expectation : make a great tactical shooter with little interference from other departments, little to no promotion and see how it goes with just going with the palyers feedback. Just put someone passionate about it and not "uncomfortale with military culture" at the head of the project and give him free reign over it. Maybe there doesn't need to be 1000 developpers on it, hell take back an A from AAA if you need but give it your fullest and see how it performs.
In an era where "creating value for the shareholders" is the absolute priority I don't see this happening, but I also don't see another good GR game being made with the current frame of mind and methods of big players like Ubisoft.
Right there with you man.Originally Posted by recklessnico Go to original post
One improvement that would help. Don't penalize me for shooting Skell employees.Originally Posted by hertz_1987 Go to original post