Ubisoft ORIGINALS and other oxymorons. | Forums

[El_Cuervacho]

GOOD Ghost Recon game if Ubisoft pushes F2p into this IP

Indeed.

[dagrommit]

Those games are looter shooters not hardcore tactical shooters. So I say again, I don't see any GOOD Ghost Recon game if Ubisoft pushes F2p into this IP

They literally stripped most of the looter shooter aspects from Breakpoint via Ghost Experience. Seeing as the CEO acknowledged Breakpoints failure (to meet players expectations) on previous calls, I'm pretty sure they know a looter shooter doesn't work for Ghost Recon.

Of course, if you think they're stupid enough to try again, you can look forward to playing Breakpoint until they decide to switch the servers off

[fastastoast]

Unpopular opinion..

If breakpoint was free Unisoft and charged for dressing up items and gunsmith bits and bobs they'd make billions. Especially the way some of this community prioritizes image over mission content..

[Rafi-KtC]

Unpopular opinion..

If breakpoint was free Unisoft and charged for dressing up items and gunsmith bits and bobs they'd make billions. Especially the way some of this community prioritizes image over mission content..

True.

Following that logic is totally possible to have (for example) WL as F2P with only cosmetic elements in the store. Most of us wouldn't care to play with the basic look, and maybe invest $30 or more for some items just to look different, IF (and that's a big huge IF) the game is good enough and players feel like supporting it.

As for previous comments, yes, most F2P are either Battle R, Looter or Team vs Team. None of them provide the tactical shooter framework. If they want to develop one they'll have to innovate and be very creative.

[Keltimus]

They literally stripped most of the looter shooter aspects from Breakpoint via Ghost Experience. Seeing as the CEO acknowledged Breakpoints failure (to meet players expectations) on previous calls, I'm pretty sure they know a looter shooter doesn't work for Ghost Recon.

Of course, if you think they're stupid enough to try again, you can look forward to playing Breakpoint until they decide to switch the servers off

I know it seems as an overreaction to F2p coming to GR, but keep in mind, Ubisoft was stupid enough to 1- make GR BP a looter shooter in the first place, 2- made the mistake of making GR more of a Final Fantasy role playing game with back and forth visits to NPCs and ridiculous side quests, 3- decided to add time consuming and heavy bullet sponging raids in the game 4- rush the game to market when everyone who had the OTT experience strongly advised them its not ready (many admitted they would not even buy the game), 5- made the stupid mistake of making everything in the game purchasable in the online store 6- they still continue to push in crossovers 7- the decision for the Wolves character designs are more appealing to fantasy gamers rather than appealing to the proper audience, 8- the decisions in classes, class challenges, and the skill tree were terrible...

Really I can go on from gunsmith decisions to character creation and so on. There's a long LONG list of poor decisions in BP and it's a trend that keeps growing since Future Soldier. I don't think they are stupid enough to make many of the same mistakes, but I do however strongly believe they will continue to make other poor decisions every time they attempt to pull in gamers outside of the tactical shooter niche. F2p might work well for their other titles, it fits well for The Division, for sure. I just wouldn't put it past Ubisoft to try and push F2p into the GR IP out of greed.

[dagrommit]

I know it seems as an overreaction to F2p coming to GR, but keep in mind, Ubisoft was stupid enough to 1- make GR BP a looter shooter in the first place, 2- made the mistake of making GR more of a Final Fantasy role playing game with back and forth visits to NPCs and ridiculous side quests, 3- decided to add time consuming and heavy bullet sponging raids in the game 4- rush the game to market when everyone who had the OTT experience strongly advised them its not ready (many admitted they would not even buy the game), 5- made the stupid mistake of making everything in the game purchasable in the online store 6- they still continue to push in crossovers 7- the decision for the Wolves character designs are more appealing to fantasy gamers rather than appealing to the proper audience, 8- the decisions in classes, class challenges, and the skill tree were terrible...

You forgot the belts

As for their design decisions, I'm fine with developers trying new things instead of churning out the same old game every two years. I just hope they are capable of learning from their bigger mistakes, as they seem to have done with the looter shooter aspect.

Unpopular opinion..

If breakpoint was free Unisoft and charged for dressing up items and gunsmith bits and bobs they'd make billions. Especially the way some of this community prioritizes image over mission content..

I will never be judgemental about people who want to customize their character, whether cosmetically or via their loadout. This community would be up in arms if the gunsmith only gave you the choice of scope/iron sights and suppressor on/off.

[TONY-NOVA]

Games are not made for gamers. They are made for investors.

[Keltimus]

You forgot the belts

As for their design decisions, I'm fine with developers trying new things instead of churning out the same old game every two years. I just hope they are capable of learning from their bigger mistakes, as they seem to have done with the looter shooter aspect.

Meh, at least the war belts exist in the military and because of that, I don't have a big issue with it in the game. Only a minor one about their design in the game.

I too don't have issues in trying new things, so long as the decisions fit the franchise and doesn't push the IP's dedicated audience out into the cold, looking for a new home.

[Steven527]

You forgot the belts

As for their design decisions, I'm fine with developers trying new things instead of churning out the same old game every two years. I just hope they are capable of learning from their bigger mistakes, as they seem to have done with the looter shooter aspect.



I will never be judgemental about people who want to customize their character, whether cosmetically or via their loadout. This community would be up in arms if the gunsmith only gave you the choice of scope/iron sights and suppressor on/off.

it is also a false premise that they are separate and mutually exclusive groups. I want better cosmetics, I also want better content, a better world design, better gunsmith, better shooting dynamics, better AI team mate AI and control. So what group do I belong in? The community requests for cosmetics has little or nothing to do with Ubi's overall design and certainly nothing to do with the looter shooter aspect. and I wouldn't be so certain about that billions. I like better cosmetics, but am I going to give Ubi oodles of cash for it? Nope. In my mind the game should be open to modders. It hasn't hurt Skyrim sales or Fallout and extends player involvement in the game.