Ghost Recon: Future Soldier

Huh, MP seems totally borked on 360 right now. Had to throw in Crysis 2 to make sure that lag wasn't just me.

I played a couple of hours tonight even without a uplay online pass. One thing I can tell is that this nothing like the old Ghost Recon and GRAW games. It feels like it's a completely different franchise and I don't know if it's for me.

I agree with you. I played a lot of Ghost Recon 2 on the PS2 and I could own with a pistol and a sniper rifle on the level snow. Which is all close quarter. That is completly ridculous but it was awesome. GR2 is still my top online FPS.

Crockpot wrote:

I played a couple of hours tonight even without a uplay online pass. One thing I can tell is that this nothing like the old Ghost Recon and GRAW games. It feels like it's a completely different franchise and I don't know if it's for me.

I took about 45 seconds of multiplayer footage to completely un-sell me on the game.

I mean, it looks beautiful, but it's even more sprint-y and less tactical than Gears of War, let alone the rest of the Ghost Recon series. It's heartbreaking to see the series complete its evolution into another COD bullet spray game.

*Legion* wrote:
Crockpot wrote:

I played a couple of hours tonight even without a uplay online pass. One thing I can tell is that this nothing like the old Ghost Recon and GRAW games. It feels like it's a completely different franchise and I don't know if it's for me.

I took about 45 seconds of multiplayer footage to completely un-sell me on the game.

I mean, it looks beautiful, but it's even more sprint-y and less tactical than Gears of War, let alone the rest of the Ghost Recon series. It's heartbreaking to see the series complete its evolution into another COD bullet spray game.

I think it's more that the guy in the video is approaching it all wrong. When I played the beta it was very much about controlling areas of the map and you ended up with very clearly defined lines that took real effort and some coordination and good timing to break.

And treating it like gears of war was a terrible idea because you aren't a bullet sponge. If you want to die way too much, sure have at it.

I only managed to play four or five maps in the beta before it ended, but it felt pretty rewarding to me to sneak around and work my way foward slowly and end up flanking the other team. I pretty quickly lost track of the number of times I'd kill three or four people before someone finally figured out where the fire was coming from.

Ghost Recon (even GRAW) was about slow paced long distance infantry combat. This is the complete opposite. Now all I want to do is to play the old Ghost Recon games.

As a counterpoint - I played a little bit of the mp this weekend and really enjoyed it. I find its use of space/cover/distance a refreshing change from other twitchy shooters.

SallyNasty wrote:

As a counterpoint - I played a little bit of the mp this weekend and really enjoyed it. I find its use of space/cover/distance a refreshing change from other twitchy shooters.

I'd like the distance more if the guns were more accurate. Maybe I just need to unlock more stuff.

Blind_Evil wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

As a counterpoint - I played a little bit of the mp this weekend and really enjoyed it. I find its use of space/cover/distance a refreshing change from other twitchy shooters.

I'd like the distance more if the guns were more accurate. Maybe I just need to unlock more stuff.

I suppose that's another problem with the COD-style multiplayer. If you are playing a supposedly tactical military shooter, you shouldn't have to grind unlocks just to get non-sh*tty weapons. It's all so very video-gamey. That's fine in an arcadey shooter like COD, but in a series that used to be about tactics (even the R6V / GRAW style), not being trusted with decent weaponry because you're only a Lieutenant would be really jarring. Plus, and maybe this is just me not knowing much about guns, even "basic" guns are way more accurate / powerful than their video game equivalents.

That isn't to say this shift is bad (and I may be reading more into it that is really there), but it isn't interesting. We already have tons of arcadey, run and gun shooter and cover stop-and-pop shooters. I was looking forward to one of the few series that comes out every year or so and is actually different. Honestly, looking at their old games, vs the newer stuff, I think there is a big change happening with Ubisoft in general. For instance, I actually really enjoyed Splinter Cell Conviction once I approached on its own terms, but it wasn't a splinter cell game anymore. Because the games are still good, I will likely play it, and likely enjoy it, but I am less excited for it now.

Maybe I should play one of the Operation Flashpoint games. I heard they are a bit like the old Ghost Recons. Anyone know the truth of that?

Garden Ninja wrote:
Blind_Evil wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

As a counterpoint - I played a little bit of the mp this weekend and really enjoyed it. I find its use of space/cover/distance a refreshing change from other twitchy shooters.

I'd like the distance more if the guns were more accurate. Maybe I just need to unlock more stuff.

I suppose that's another problem with the COD-style multiplayer. If you are playing a supposedly tactical military shooter, you shouldn't have to grind unlocks just to get non-sh*tty weapons. It's all so very video-gamey. That's fine in an arcadey shooter like COD, but in a series that used to be about tactics (even the R6V / GRAW style), not being trusted with decent weaponry because you're only a Lieutenant would be really jarring. Plus, and maybe this is just me not knowing much about guns, even "basic" guns are way more accurate / powerful than their video game equivalents.

That isn't to say this shift is bad (and I may be reading more into it that is really there), but it isn't interesting. We already have tons of arcadey, run and gun shooter and cover stop-and-pop shooters. I was looking forward to one of the few series that comes out every year or so and is actually different. Honestly, looking at their old games, vs the newer stuff, I think there is a big change happening with Ubisoft in general. For instance, I actually really enjoyed Splinter Cell Conviction once I approached on its own terms, but it wasn't a splinter cell game anymore. Because the games are still good, I will likely play it, and likely enjoy it, but I am less excited for it now.

Maybe I should play one of the Operation Flashpoint games. I heard they are a bit like the old Ghost Recons. Anyone know the truth of that?

Having only played Dragon Rising, it felt like it was trying to be GR, but not nearly as polished. The controls weren't nearly as tight, and the combat felt very random - I didn't feel very confident walking into a firefight. This could be an "accuracy" issue, but I certainly didn't feel like a highly-trained group of marines able to hold my own.

While the new maps arent as big or have wide sweeping areas like the old games it still requires, i'd almost say demands, teamwork to make any headway.

Garden Ninja wrote:

Maybe I should play one of the Operation Flashpoint games. I heard they are a bit like the old Ghost Recons. Anyone know the truth of that?

What you're looking for are the games from Bohemia Interactive.

They developed the original Operation: Flashpoint game, as well as the ArmA games. (They actually later re-released Operation: Flashpoint under the name ArmA: Cold War Assault).

These are the games you want.

All Operation: Flashpoint titles after the first one are developed by someone else. These games still are Ghost Recon-y, but not as good of games.

If you like these kind of games, I strongly recommend picking up ArmA X: Anniversary Edition on Steam. You'll get the re-named Operation: Flashpoint, plus the first two ArmA titles and a bunch of expansion/DLC content.

The non-Bohemia Operation: Flashpoint games are worth picking up if you see them cheap on sale sometime.

Garden Ninja wrote:
Blind_Evil wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

As a counterpoint - I played a little bit of the mp this weekend and really enjoyed it. I find its use of space/cover/distance a refreshing change from other twitchy shooters.

I'd like the distance more if the guns were more accurate. Maybe I just need to unlock more stuff.

I suppose that's another problem with the COD-style multiplayer. If you are playing a supposedly tactical military shooter, you shouldn't have to grind unlocks just to get non-sh*tty weapons. It's all so very video-gamey. That's fine in an arcadey shooter like COD, but in a series that used to be about tactics (even the R6V / GRAW style), not being trusted with decent weaponry because you're only a Lieutenant would be really jarring. Plus, and maybe this is just me not knowing much about guns, even "basic" guns are way more accurate / powerful than their video game equivalents.

After playing 3 multiplayer rounds, I can pretty much say that the starting guns aren't really that underpowered. It's much more knowing the maps and working as a team. Especially the shotguns... which are close to actually realistic in terms of engagement range. I was reliably getting kills at 30 meters, and testing out a customized shotgun on the firing range gives fairly accurate results out to 60 meters.

I really hate these online passes. I understand that I can only get to level five, but it wouldn't even let me join Sally's game and he was playing one of the modes that was open to me.

cube wrote:

After playing 3 multiplayer rounds, I can pretty much say that the starting guns aren't really that underpowered. It's much more knowing the maps and working as a team. Especially the shotguns... which are close to actually realistic in terms of engagement range. I was reliably getting kills at 30 meters, and testing out a customized shotgun on the firing range gives fairly accurate results out to 60 meters.

This actually really impressed me, to be honest. No game has ever given shotguns their due credit, at least not in a way that isn't incredibly stupid.

I played a few games with cube last night and this is the first MP game in a while I can see myself sticking with. I really like it - but the games seem to always be super lopsided. You either completely own the other team or they destroy you. One is more fun than the other:) I just need to learn the maps, I guess.

I recommend the game and would still love to do some more MP with a full group communicating.

I will be down for some MP around 9 central tonight (and basically most nights). GT is in my sigg, although I think i am friends with most of you already.

I think this is a really fun game.

Picked this up on an impulse over the weekend and have a couple of hours into the MP. In general, while it doesn't feel like the old GRAW or first gen Ghost Recon games, it does have a different tone than CoD or BF3. For one, there's no straight-up TDM mode. All MP modes have some objective that you need to attack or defend. That right there changes the type of player that's engaging in this game online. Also, the damage model is high. A couple of shots will take you down pretty quickly. And finally, cover seems very important. Standing around strafing corners just gets you shot.

I'd like more open maps but maybe in testing, those just generate into snipefests.

I think the fact that it requires you to play it strategically to succeed is the reason I am enjoying the MP so much. It really rewards you with nice XP when you play it the way it wants you to.

I really want to get some games in. Finished the campaign, which started to really make me annoyed in the final sections.

Can we get a group to commit to thursday night? If only a few people are interested, I would be down to try Guerilla any time we can get 4.

Thursday nights are out for me. That's the one night a week I go hang out with my friends.

I'll be splitting my time between Uncharted 3 and GR:FS this week. Anytime you see me on (usually around 8-9 PM CST), I'll play some Guerilla or wander into the hive of villainy that is competitive MP.

I can do thursday nights and I have a non GWJer friend who can do thursdays.

Thursday is the first day of a 9 day vacation for me. It is a vacation in which I have no schedule, no plans, no anything. I can do whatever the heck I want.

Vidja games are on the list.

I will try to be on to play this Thursday night.

Just picked up the game. I am diving in tonight.

If you are on the 360, friend me up.

im thinking bout renting this to just to pass the time to the pc launch.

Trashie and I just played a few guerilla games. Seems fun, but do the number of enemies increase with the number of players?

Also, just in case anyone else has this problem. It kept saying that one of us had downloaded content the other had not, I had to delete my install of the game for us to be able to play together.

obirano wrote:

Trashie and I just played a few guerilla games. Seems fun, but do the number of enemies increase with the number of players?

Also, just in case anyone else has this problem. It kept saying that one of us had downloaded content the other had not, I had to delete my install of the game for us to be able to play together.

Weird bug. For now, I'm going to leave it uninstalled. It'll be easier to get a group together instead of trying to get everyone to install the game to the undersized first gen HDD.

I played the first mission and had a blast. The mechanics feel good and I like the on-rails approach much better than the open-ended maps of the last game. It is too early to make a real judgement, but it makes a great first impression. I like it so far.