Jump to content
Ghost Recon.net Forums

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

For anyone who knows me, it's probably not a secret that I deeply disdain later iterations of the game series and hold only Red Storm Entertainment's Ghost Recon from 2001 in highest regard. I've expr

If you post anymore Coco media 101, people are going to think you have a fixation...

Posted Images

I've never disliked having 3rd person myself. Considering how easy it is to setup a camera in most game engines this should be a normal thing. 

 

Including the option to force first person in online competition play. 

 

The niche isnt do to funding, sf cuts, or anythig of that sorts. It is more then likely a cultural change at large. 

There has been a few studies that IMO give this idea some merrit. There may be thousands or millions of "niche" tactical gamers left out there but no solid titles to draw them all in. Arma series being one of the most successful. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
  • 2 months later...

still playing it, still enough flexibility to setup gameplay to my tastes...

though i do hate myself for again undertaking the damn tier mode on another file...

...if Ubi does enough to tweak the enemy AI presence and the QRF system then i will gladly do a 4th playthrough..

the map is as impressive as ever, such easily recognizable geography..

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I still fail to see why there's still hate against this game especially from GR diehards. Is it OGR 2.0? No.  But it is way better than anything that came after GR, any competitors, and even better and more polished than ARMA. Think it's too easy? turn off all the hud elements and up the difficulty. The game gives you a ginormous map and you're free to play it as you see fit. It's a good game in it's own right and really scratches that tactical with freedom itch we all have. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, I think the game is middling at best, even by Ubisoft's standards. It's like Far Cry, except less fun and more clunky. Actually does Wildlands do anything that sets it apart from Far Cry besides being in third person and having squad AI?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I felt Far Cry was a decent concept weighed down by a lame story you were forced to participate in and it wasn't really sure if it was an open world fps rpg or on rails fps. 

Wildlands gave us the whole "capture outposts" gameplay free from strings attached found in games like Far Cry or Metal Gear Solid 5. It took the best parts from those games and added tacticool realism that had really been absent in the gaming world. Wildlands had no filler, it was a to the point "capture outpost" game, repetitive yes, but total freedom also yes. it doesnt suffer from an identity crisis like many other Ubisoft games do. 

I'm not saying its a 10/10 best game ever but I am saying its a game that knows what it is and is very enjoyable.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually feel like MGSV does most of what Wildlands can do but better. The stealth is better, the AI is better, the animations are better, the outposts are better, the support options are better. I could even argue the shooting is better since there's a lot of variations in how enemies react to getting hit.

Sure it doesn't have squad AI but I've found companions like D-Dog and Quiet far more useful than the Wildlands Ghost team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will give MGSV the edge for stealth gameplay. The AI is way more dynamic, bodies can be hidden, and there are way more tools available to support stealth gameplay. That being said I'm not a fan of the MGS story. The cooky Japanese story telling is only made worse by the game literally forcing it on you.

Yeah, some of the outposts may be better until you realize you capture the same ones multiple times each throughout the game. The world is just corridors masking as an open world in between the same outposts. The shooting feels way to loose and using anything but tranquilizers is pointless because the game encourages non lethal playthroughs. And of course there's the horrible grinding feature (motherbase) to unlock nearly everything. Who wants to farm research staff, gather materials, then wait 3 whole days to develop/unlock a water pistol?

Overall polish has also been a strong point of the MGS series. Konami/Kojima really have a knack for the small details. MGSV and it's Fox engine has given me the smoothest gameplay experience i've ever had. Animations and overall fluidity are bar none.

Sadly all of this is irrelevant because MGSV is an unfinished game that was sold for full price. Wildlands was sold as a finished project and to this day still has patches and new content. There's no comparison there. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

> Yeah, some of the outposts may be better until you realize you capture the same ones multiple times each throughout the game. The world is just corridors masking as an open world in between the same outposts.

Sounds like Wildlands, except its less corridors and more an empty wasteland in between the outposts. Granted it does have actual ambient life so I'll give it a point over MGSV for that.

>The shooting feels way to loose and using anything but tranquilizers is pointless because the game encourages non lethal playthroughs.

Not really. Tranqs become unreliable since the enemy starts using hard counters like body armor and helmets. It's actually cheaper to just use guns with actual bullets since tranqs require a specific type of plant to produce. Besides that the game is a lot more lenient about being lethal than previous games since you can actually S rank missions with that playstyle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A year on and I don't really play the game, but then I don't game much at all.

I think it was Blue Fox dialogue that summed up the bits that weren't quite right with the game but extremely impressed with what the game gave us.

Not much to fix to make the game a 10/10 from my perspective.

Better squad controls, no ridiculous QRFs, no annoying and repetitive dialogue. Happy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not played it in awhile but have put in some hours recently. I have noticed Ansel works when there is allot of action going on where before it would crash the game.
I have 400+ hours in SP so I can't say I did not enjoy it. I agree about repetitive dialogue and I miss having the option of FP perspective but nothing against 3rd person. Vehicles and friendly AI take too much damage. It is a fun game but not to be taken too seriously as I have too suspend my dis-belief allot.  I would like to play co-op with my regular GR partners but they are not interested. We still play GR most Sundays.
Engage.jpg 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...