Surveys: Ubisoft Can't IGNORE this | Forums

[UbiT00n]

We are definitely not ignoring the results from these surveys, it's a great way for us to quantify information to reach the devs.
So I do encourage you all to fill them out when you see them.
I would also like to thank the guys who have spent the time to put these together, your work has not gone un-noticed.

[jmagnum50]

Well Rugby,

Maybe I'm confused, but it may sound like something too challenging, and some players, like myself, couldn't handle at first, sorry to say. I tried played ghost mode on Wildlands like 2 or 3 times, and yes I got killed in all attempts.
I tried it out to get the exosuit, and any other rewards from prestige crates would have been nice too. However, what was really off-putting was the permadeath mechanic. Everytime I die, I have to work up all of my stats, and during regular mode, that took a long time. It felt like doing it in a semi-realistic mode felt like it was too much even for a nice looking outfit.
So that is (perhaps one reason) why I thought maybe an alternative mode that you'd unlock and for some people, truly test yourself. I may have gotten it confused as I mentioned really, really hard, like "good luck surviving this" mode, and I'm really not trying to offend anyone. If things like a weight mechanic or something like that work right, even for casuals and people who start off on easy and work their way up, then that's good. If not, then that's why I suggested different modes.

[Eagle-eyezx]

We are definitely not ignoring the results from these surveys, it's a great way for us to quantify information to reach the devs.
So I do encourage you all to fill them out when you see them.
I would also like to thank the guys who have spent the time to put these together, your work has not gone un-noticed.

It's awesome that you replied, noticing all the work that these guys have done and that you're engaged with us. That really does go a long way. Thanks Ubitoon.

[Eagle-eyezx]

Well Rugby,

Maybe I'm confused, but it may sound like something too challenging, and some players, like myself, couldn't handle at first, sorry to say. I tried played ghost mode on Wildlands like 2 or 3 times, and yes I got killed in all attempts.
I tried it out to get the exosuit, and any other rewards from prestige crates would have been nice too. However, what was really off-putting was the permadeath mechanic. Everytime I die, I have to work up all of my stats, and during regular mode, that took a long time. It felt like doing it in a semi-realistic mode felt like it was too much even for a nice looking outfit.
So that is (perhaps one reason) why I thought maybe an alternative mode that you'd unlock and for some people, truly test yourself. I may have gotten it confused as I mentioned really, really hard, like "good luck surviving this" mode, and I'm really not trying to offend anyone. If things like a weight mechanic or something like that work right, even for casuals and people who start off on easy and work their way up, then that's good. If not, then that's why I suggested different modes.

I think what Breakpoint did great, which makes me like it more than Wildlands, is having the ability to customise the world and its settings.

If they give us more options to customise the gameplay and world in the next game, it will cater to the hardcore Milsim guys and those who just want to play a casual game after work.

[jmagnum50]

Thanks Eagle,

Like I said, not trying to offend, just thinking of some for (just about) all of us. Plus, I don't know if I'm ready for more realistic mechanics yet, myself.

[rugby_dog]

Thanks Eagle,

Like I said, not trying to offend, just thinking of some for (just about) all of us. Plus, I don't know if I'm ready for more realistic mechanics yet, myself.

Considering games like the last of us, red dead etc have more realistic mechanics in them, I think you’ll be fine. There is currently a massive gap between current mechanics and full on arma, I think what most people are asking for is somewhere in the middle which would be more akin to most other games on the market.

[Kean_1]

Look Kean,

I'm not trying to offend.

Please, stop apologizing for offending people. You're not and believe me, I'm not taking anything you say personally. If I thought you were being offensive, I'd simply put you on my ignore list and not respond to any of your comments. You've got an opinion and you're sharing it. You don't need to keep apologizing for that IMO.

I'd been saying in other posts that maybe Ubi devs look at past iterations for ideas, like GRAW 2 and FS. A mix of playstyles from these two for regular and new players. Another mode, like a Ghost mode or restrictive difficulty setting would be for people who want to try their luck/skill with it, once unlocked. Kinda like saying "Okay, you beat the regular game mode, now see if you have what it takes to be a true ghost".

You have to realize that not all GR fans look toward FS or even GRAW2 with the nostalgia that you do. I would even argue that sentiments toward FS are mixed as some felt the franchise was taking a wrong direction by that time. Personally, I hated FS and really didn’t like the futuristic take in Ubi's vision for the series. That game pretty much stuck a fork in the franchise for me until Wildlands came along and Ubi purposely distanced themselves from the tech and went back to their roots as they described.

Having said that, I still think there might be some elements from those games that work well in the next GR game going forward

Ghost Mode:

Let me give you a run down on that one......

For a long time the WL community had been asking for several, relatively simple features in the main campaign such as a single main weapon, realistic reloads (which were already a thing in Custom Match PvP), the managing of loadouts being limited to safe houses and crates and a choice to play as a "lone wolf" without the team AI.

Now, here's the key to all of this...... The community had asked for these things to be implemented as OPTIONS but Ubi surprised everyone when they locked nearly all of the new features behind a new permadeath mode. ....a mode with a feature no one really asked for and those few I recall that did want permadeath (again) only wanted it as an option. PD was not a popular suggestion in the community from what I recall and I was quite active over there. Also, WL still had some bugs that in a normal game were simply annoyances requiring a restart to your last save but with permadeath became a big problem as you can imagine. Many lost their progress as a result of being stuck in a rock, the AI not reviving them, other glitches, etc.

.....so, when you use Ghost Mode as an example, it really doesn't resonate with me to be honest. Besides, GM was a mode that was introduced much later in the game's life and the PD feature was not as popular as you imagine. Some of us on PS were able to work around it by using the cloud feature on our saves so at least we didn't have to start all over again. All we wanted were the new features we had asked for. .....but even then they couldn’t do that right IMO as the "realistic reloads" were still just mag dumps vs. the choice of a tactical reload adding unspent ammo back to the pool.

A lot of the same can be said for Tier One which again was a mode added later to the game and IMO, implemented quite poorly. It only served to highlight issues with the enemy AI and they went about it all wrong in regard to how they made the gameplay more challenging. .....basically just buffing the AI damage, increasing their accuracy, speed of reinforcements, introducing an RPG mechanic to the weapons, etc. Tier One was actually a sign of what was to come in the next GR game that we now know as Breakpoint.

Now, if some GR fans try it and don't like it, let them stick to regular until they are ready, or maybe regular is their style. I was comparing it to WL's Ghost mode, originally. I've been playing GR for quite sometime now, but as I said I myself haven't been hoping for more restrictive playstyles. Besides, I'm not trying to turn GR into COD or Fortnite. Many GR fans, like you and me, are different. I'm just trying to make an idea that makes it tactical and accessable. Not all GR fans want to play the same way as others do, nowadays.

My point was that I don't think Ubi should be creating a GR game for the lowest common denominator. First and foremost, make the GR game fans want. If they find value in adding an arcade mode or whatever, that's fine but don't deliver a dumbed down / watered down game. The wants of the community as shown in polls like these should be what drives the vision for the next game. .....not as an afterthought in the form of a separate mode.

In either case, they can still add difficulty levels and options too while still maintaining a higher level of authenticity, realistic aspects and depth / immersion. ....and I've said this before a bunch of times but just because these elements are added doesn't mean the gameplay is no longer accessible to the masses. Things like team AI commands, ammo management, damage modeling, ballistics, etc. can be improved in ways that make the game much more immersive but also approachable. The commands for example can include ways to command the whole team and give simple order to follow, stop, attack along with ROE orders. ....but there could also be ways to control individual members of the team or advanced commands to stack up, breach, cover a certain zone, team formations and so on.

You are viewing all of this as extremes and features that would be too restrictive. It doesn’t have to feel that way but again, without some level of control of what a player can do, where exactly is the challenge? Allowing a player to carry everything but the kitchen sink, vacuum up all the ammo they need, etc. is very arcadish and not very challenging IMO. I just think it’s time for Ubi to stop trying to reimagine the game to attract the masses and get back to making GR what it needs to be . …..the best squad based, military, tactical shooter it can be. If they do that (IMO) it will attract more players to the franchise naturally as GR will be offering a unique experience. It really doesn’t need to be like everyone else.

Considering games like the last of us, red dead etc have more realistic mechanics in them, I think you’ll be fine. There is currently a massive gap between current mechanics and full on arma, I think what most people are asking for is somewhere in the middle which would be more akin to most other games on the market.

….exactly. Folks asking for more authentic elements, realistic aspects, deeper mechanics, etc. doesn’t mean turning GR into a military simulator. …..far from it. Even games like CoD:MW (2019) have aspects that are more realistic / authentic than what we see in GR these days.

Let’s use ammo management for example….. A milsim/milsimish game might have magazine management and two forms of reloads consisting of fast and tactical. The fast reload is a little faster than tactical but is essentially a dump of the magazine and any ammo remaining in it. A tactical reoload would be one where the partially used magazine is retained (along with the ammo inside) and replaced with another. The trade off for the sake of gameplay balance would be that the reload time would be a little bit longer.

A fast reload has the obvious benefit of being faster which may be desirable in the midst of a firefight. However, in between engagements or while under hard cover, the choice of a tactical reload may be more attractive. ……especially when you want to top off just before you think you might make contact.

Now, in a game that more milsim, they may have ammo management to the extent where ammo is shown as magazines in your inventory. When performing a tactical reload, the partially used mag is placed at the end. Eventually, you will reload and the partially used magazine will only have what was remaining in it vs. as showing as a full magazine.

Let’s adapt a more simplified version to our pretend game that we want to make accessible to more causal players…… The reloads and purpose for them remain the same. Fast reloads are quicker but you lose the ammo and tactical reloads are slower but you retain the remaining ammo. Now, instead of going the extra distance and having players possibly surprised or maybe annoyed by partially used magazines, the unused ammo in a tactical reload is instead added back to the round count. The game still keep track of ammunition in the form of how many rounds the player has and the unsused ammo is simply added back to the pool. …..or discarded in the case of a fast reload.

As far as the reloading action itself, it could simply be distinguished between the long or double press of the reload button.

This is just an example but it goes to show how a more realistic aspect (retaining mags / ammo in during changes) can be implemented in a game without going to an extreme that you may see in more milsim oriented titles. Hell, in DayZ you actually have to reload magazines individually and there is no ammo count. You have to look to see what’s in your inventory and what is currently in the weapon. That to me is milsim.

[Church367A]

I think this entire notion of the need for a more accessible, or dumbed down, gameplay if followed is going to be what will continue to drag Ghost Recon to be mediocre at best. Take the Splinter Cell DLC and how even though you can play it without gearscore, you cannot deny that the missions, with the conclusive arena boss fight are clearly designed to be played with gearscore on and it ruins the experience. Or look past that and just take the AI that willfully stand still waiting for the next bullet after their buddy drops dead so you can have your next easy headshot with AI that were meant to be bullet sponges where headshots matter more and it is still a lackluster experience.

If games such as Ghosts of Tsushima, RDR2, MGSV, among other games that are designed around a clear focus and can offer more of a challenge can be successful, then why is it that suddenly it won't work for Ghost Recon? Even COD Modern Warfare was being hailed for a grittier and more grounded story with highlight missions that were like those clearing terrorist housing slowly, room by room, and that is COD of all things.

Yet with Ghost Recon there always seem to be a constant notion that it must be made in such a way that if a toddler cannot play it, then it is too challenging and will sell poorly. I think that entire notion is garbage and that Ghost Recon needs to regain a fundamental design focus on returning to being an actual squad based tactical shooter rather than just an airsoft military cosmetically themed open world mediocre shooter.

[Kean_1]

.....and in the meantime I just got my beta invite to Insurgency Sandstorm so I will be trying out the co-op in that to see how it is.

[Eagle-eyezx]

.....and in the meantime I just got my beta invite to Insurgency Sandstorm so I will be trying out the co-op in that to see how it is.

Buddy, that's all you need right now. Enjoy it. I'll be going ghost when the game comes out.