Jump to content
Ghost Recon.net Forums

Little things that would help make Wildlands for you


Recommended Posts

We've talked quite a bit about the major things we want from Wildlands (challenge, plenty of content, it to be good in various other broadly applicable metrics), but what about little things? Stuff that's superfluous or unnecessary but would be fun to have anyway.

Being able to outfit my entire team with weapons, gear and clothing as I see fit. As someone who's loves playing operator dressup in games, this'd be pretty nice.

Edited by TJbrena
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There aren't many 'little things' that I want as far as attention to detail; generally if a game gets essential design concepts right 'theater of the mind' lets me completely overcome and ignore the annoyances.  Smaller critical things that are missing from far too many Ubisoft Clancy games are:

 

· functional text mode or menu driven communication
· realistic weapon performance that is at least consistent in terms of scale
· no server browser alternative (an easy feature to code/add)
· game features that are there to conspicuously 'milk' the player for money and grind time playing


But again deference to original Ghost Recon makes the case clear; by current standards it's rough edges all over, but it remains extraordinarily immersive and re-playable -- perhaps one of the most immersive ever made because it gets so many essential aspects of game design right, and has so much continuity. Perhaps this was down to attention to detail on the basis of what tools could do at the time but it appears to have more to do with excellent management of the game design prioritization and attention to making certain essentials were done right.

By way of example: Ubisoft continues to ignore players that simply can not or will not use VOIP in all its Clancy games since SOAF.  This completely obviates an essential part of gaming across all MP game genre. Siege is a 'sort of' exception because it offers a text console you can type in, but there's no menu driven, real-time means to communicate outside of VOIP with your friends or pick-up players -- even though just about every game except Ubisoft's offers an alternative.

When there are essential and easy to incorporate features missing from a game that obviate sustainable interest in the game for a large number of player s(that would otherwise be sustained and sustainable) it's an epic Jean-Luc Picard  face palm of 'WT4 were they thinking?...'.

Communications menus that drive text and/or pre-recorded voice messages, server browsers, and simple game option that give the user choice that are easy and inexpensive to incorporate features for a Developer/Publisher that will fell users in droves from the play-share in their absence completely obviate 'the little things' or attention to detail that may make a game more appealing in the short term but just as unsustainable and unappealing in the long term when these more important things are absent; especially when there are so many appealing game alternatives Gamers can give their time and attention...

 

Edited by 101459
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be happy with character/weapon customization, modding capability and a half decent story with no 'right' way to do something as dictated by the developer. If I alert someone, I don't want it to be an instant mission fail, I want to suffer the actual consequences of being busted, and work around that. FS kinda dropped the ball there with instant mission fails on alerting an enemy you probably would've killed next anyway.

 
And at least with modding capability, if there's something i feel the game should have, I can add it in. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree... The absence of mod support doesn't just obviate the interest of Gamers that like to create content, it, like the absence of a sever browser in a game like Siege obviates important tools for the Developer & Publisher: knowing (vs. guessing) what your Customers really want.  If Siege had a server browser Ubisoft would know there are maps and game modes on maps that are concurrently rotated on all servers, that are a complete deal-breaker; everyone leaves, and play-share tanks for hours or even the rest of the day...

Similarly there are deal breaking features (or absence of features) content that's considered completely uninteresting, useless, or essential and missing that in the absence of mod support a Developer/Publisher (especially one lacking in any self-effacing analysis) will never know about -- mod support offers free agile development and marketing analysis that responds instantly to the market of Fan interest; no Publisher will ever be able to match that capability.

Edited by 101459
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Being able to gear-up my squad comes to mind.

Realistic weapon handling along with bullet-drop is another

Proper command interface

Freedom and no fail states, i dont want to see any STOP YOU ARE LEAVING THE MISSION AREA TURN BAAAACK

A good/decent story that keeps me interested with multiple types of objectives/missions, if the entire game is kill this guy,kill that guy etc i will get bored.

Mods would also be nice, but we all know this is just a wet dream.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly super realistic, but the ability to drift vehicles would be really cool. Not asking for a tacked on racing minigame (screw that) or it to be a significant mechanic in the game. I just want it for reasons.

1472089404146.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Soulswapping! To add to earlier posts, there should be an option to customize your AI team if playing offline. To get the greatest use out of this, allow the player to switch over to the other teammates. Also, if things go bad and a guy is dead, the mission is NOT over until the rest of the team is wiped out too!

This is one element I have not seen in gaming for a while, and would be cool to have implemented in wildlands!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

If they let us interrogate them, I hope we get either some Chaos Theory-tier dialogue or do some CIA stuff where we put bags over their heads, throw them into a trunk and interrogate them at a safehouse.

Edited by TJbrena
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2016 at 06:05, 101459 said:

Agree... The absence of mod support doesn't just obviate the interest of Gamers that like to create content, it, like the absence of a sever browser in a game like Siege obviates important tools for the Developer & Publisher: knowing (vs. guessing) what your Customers really want.  If Siege had a server browser Ubisoft would know there are maps and game modes on maps that are concurrently rotated on all servers, that are a complete deal-breaker; everyone leaves, and play-share tanks for hours or even the rest of the day...

Similarly there are deal breaking features (or absence of features) content that's considered completely uninteresting, useless, or essential and missing that in the absence of mod support a Developer/Publisher (especially one lacking in any self-effacing analysis) will never know about -- mod support offers free agile development and marketing analysis that responds instantly to the market of Fan interest; no Publisher will ever be able to match that capability.

 

I'm sure the days of modding are gone. Modding was hip back in the early 2000's. GR 1. But developers saw that the mod community was just as good if not better than the devs themselves. So they create games that cannot be modded so you buy DLC. DLC may add some little time to a game but it does get old because most games have no replayability.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Papa6 said:

I'd like 1st person view. 3rd person is a bit old. 1st person gives the impression of one actually playing the game.

 

I like both as there are limitations in terms of realism for both perspectives, and both have veracity in a serious tactical realism game. 'First person' is a bit of a misnomer -- as it's really not first person; those aren't your hands on the screen, and just as many others get more of a sense of immersion from one perspective as the other...

Functionally we don't have the FOV or distance vision in games we have in the real world -- regardless of game perspective: you can turn your eyes and back, and notice things far into your peripheral vision in the real world in a fraction of the time you can accomplish the same in a game or sim where it would be a dizzying, impossible to track camera experience...

Regarding either perspective; even with 4k displays we can only resolve detail at a fraction of the distance we can in the real world demonstrating another limitation though obviously more so for third person, but still your splitting hairs here as neither perspective allows you to resolve enough detail for realistic distance of engagement -- which is something the original Ghost Recon at least attempted to address...

17 hours ago, Papa6 said:

I'm sure the days of modding are gone. Modding was hip back in the early 2000's. GR 1. But developers saw that the mod community was just as good if not better than the devs themselves. So they create games that cannot be modded so you buy DLC. DLC may add some little time to a game but it does get old because most games have no replayability.

This is a misnomer I'm sad to still see echoed, apparently still believed by some game fans, and (more sadly) a fair number of Publishers -- which numbers just don't bare out as fact. Several years ago GD Mag did an excellent article on this, and if you consider the larger context in resolving what game fans want, and how they buy, it's easy to see things you might not intuit as far as how mod support actually adds considerably to game sales and revenue... In brief (even though it may not appear that way -- this is the short version):

Mod support offers a nearly instant response to fan desire for fixes, changes, and/or content giving a game agile development support few Developer/Publishers can or will afford. For clarity an instant response doesn't mean instant content and fixes (though it can) but that someone has acknowledged a problem or the absence of something and is working on it; this is an ace in the hole as far as inspiring confidence in the purchase decision for a lot of 'would be' Fans to actually move forward and buy.

Mod support can offer a Publisher over a billion (calculated number in USD$ circa 2015 for ArmA/DayZ) in free marketing and advertising, with market penetration no commercial marketing campaign can ever reach. Mod sites, forums, social media, and YouTube videos that mods generate would cost an absolutely spectacular sum to replicate with commercial advertising, and would not be responding to the audience the way mod delta of gaming does.

Mod support is free market testing for Developer/Publishers that will ascertain in depth what actually appeals to their audiences at no cost, and has demonstrated to lead to more successful DLC, expansions, and sequels. No focus group, or market test can achieve what mod support does in this regard at any cost, and replicating even a crude attempt at this commercially would exceed the budget of the game.

Mod support also brings the next generation of Developers on-line; every game engine uses unique tools, design and techniques, and the cost savings in having self-taught Developers learn master your tools on their time is enormous. Many a Studio features a top Developer that mastered his or her craft and is at the top of the game (no pun here) exactly because of this.

Increased revenue isn't just increased sales, it's cost savings; and the idea that mods compete with DLC, expansions, and sequels is as absurd as Continental tires compete with BMW car sales because some BMW owners might decide to discard the OEM rubber in favor of after-market tires.

Mod support is free agile development and support for a game; mod Developers frequently fix deal-breaking issues that Developer/Publishers don't have the resources of time, budget, and QC assets to assess and resolve -- very much like FOSS projects mod support leverages the talent of hundreds of millions of people not just as free mod Developers but Testers that are much more enthusiastic to test someone's free labor of love, then guinea pig and shill test for a big Publisher to help them decide which of two unappealing alternatives is less unappealing.

Freer markets and freer minds build better everything...

Edited by 101459
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another part of the question is how hard is it to implement mod capability to a game?  Bethesda's Gamebryo and Creation engines are highly moddable, but a large part of this is because the engine has barely changed from it's Morrowind iteration. The tools of development are simple because they come from a simpler time. 

Now there's a smorgasbord of proprietary engines and tools, plus DRM, specific platforms for launching games on PC (i.e. Origin) and anti-tampering software meant to deter pirates, who always win in the end anyway.

As development has become more complex and corporations more protective of their IPs, mod support has become either an afterthought or a minefield of issues because of corporate protectionism.

The reason for the comparatively cool devs in the former Eastern Bloc is that a lot of these guys started off selling bootleg games or doing cracks in the 80s and 90s. 

Edited by TJbrena
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, TJbrena said:

Another part of the question is how hard is it to implement mod capability to a game?

I apologize for the digression from your original topic; but think it's important and you guys invited it. Though Publishers will defend the un-modability of their 'game products' profusely with with some of the things you mention, closer examination shows it's corporate ineptitude and lassitude almost every time. The most typical objections include:

· cost of third party tool licensure is prohibitive
· the tools are too complex for 'stupid gamers' to understand and use
· the tools would 'expose' the game to exploit or piracy

All of these objections have been handled and are demonstrated to be ridiculous. There are games that set the standard for state of the art mod support, and some earn more revenue in a financial quarter then Ubisoft's top ten do in a calendar year, it's not hard to see this is a load just to cover the status quo, and lack of market competence.

Virtually all third party tool Developer/Vendors want their tools to see more exposure, for more people to use, learn and like them, and are all-in with including a free license model with Developer/Publishers as part of a game for their customers that create non-commercial content. Some will even discount the commercial license contract the Developer/Publisher is paying for already to do exactly this because it's free advertising. In anycase where this isn't the case, it's because of abject failure of the Developer/Publisher to negotiate good deals, not the intransigence or expense of doing business with third party tool Developers...

While there are exceptions administrative and executive business officers I've met in the game industry are some of the laziest and most inept business people on the planet, only hold the jobs they do because they can't work anywhere else, and they know even less about game development then business -- which doesn't help.

As for 'the tools are too complex and difficult for stupid gamers' -- well, perhaps, as unfortunately a very large number of people that game may be barely bright enough to tie their own shoes and feed themselves, and perhaps they're gaming due to a trend of games appealing to the lowest possible denominator. But rather then looking at the bottom of the barrel -- games that offer some of the most complex SOTA mod tools obviously have an audience of Mod Developers that's more then large enough to churn fixes and content at a staggering rate, ArmA and Counter Strike content now can be measured in Petabytes...

Mod support exposing games to exploit and piracy is a premise based on complete corporate ignorance of what's really happening in the world, and as subterfuge to cover horrible sales in stock Shareholder meetings. Mod support has done more to obviate exploits and piracy in games that offer this support then they have exacerbated it, and the unavoidable piracy that exists is obviated by better sales.

As for the technical 'difficulty' of rolling out an MDK or SDK with the game, it's about has hard as composing a forum post for the motivated.

 

Edited by 101459
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of the modding community exposing exploits in the DRM and piracy. i'd have to say that's utterly false. 

In all of the modding communities i've been in, modders who have some standing in the community will be telling people who have pirated to buy the damn game. 

Some people faced problems wth their pirate copies because it was a version behind and therefore the mod they want to use doesnt work.

They contact the modder, the modder finds out its a pirate version of the game. tells the person to buy the game if they want the hassle to stop.

Modders have no reason to be finding exploits or encouraging piracy. and more often than not they're doing the opposite.

 

I really wish some devs knew this, instead of ostracising and blaming the modding community for things that werent their fault in the first place.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Zeealex said:

In terms of the modding community exposing exploits in the DRM and piracy. i'd have to say that's utterly false. 

Not sure what you're saying there -- but by way of example Mod Developers have exposed exploits in Steam DRM to Valve that has improved not just the security but the performance of Steam DRM... The same is true of BI, their DRM, and third-party Battleeye anti-cheat system... While this isn't necessarily an outcome achieved through the mod tools themselves, it's because of the kind of talent and audience these games, their Developers, and the tools they offer attract -- because these games offer mod support.

While a dollar figure could be assigned to a single spin-off of this kind might only confer a small savings -- the good will, reassurance, and and marketing valuation are enormous. And there are stories like this happening every day with Valve/Steam, BI, Activision et. al -- getting these titles with mod support hundreds or even thousands of mentions on game review sites, generating the creation of new fan sites, new entries and marketing on ModDB, YouTube, Social Media, Forums, and popular Fan Site -- with enormous follow-up sales for these Publishers.  

Obviously none of this happening anymore with Ubisoft or anything it produces and we see the consequences in what we get for our money.

Edited by 101459
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as lack of modding tools can be justified to suits who've never played anything but Words With Friends with their spouse, we won't see them much.

DLC (especially cosmetics) and planned obsolescence play into this, though they could just release the MDK after all DLC was out. But then you still have to make sure free mods aren't cutting into your cosmetic DLC profits. Of course, Ubisoft could always implement paid mods.

But to try and rerail this thread, if Wildlands had a drifting mechanic it'd be a huge plus in my book.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I agree with Papa6. First Person View is essential in this "shooter game". I do not like 3rd person view.

If this game is as "open world" as they say.............and I won't encounter a "Return To Combat Area" warning.................I am good. I hope to try the Beta before I buy.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Papa6 said:

I'll probably wait to see what the reviews are first. I have bought too many drink coasters.

Ya, more like tokens of my gullability in Steam and Uplay...

Little things that would help make Wildlands work for...anyone (in order of importance):

· net code that works
· a server browser
· AI that isn't a marching line of zombies
· no more DRM disguised as an MMS

· PC centric settings
· no MMS on PC

I know good luck, wrong game...

Edited by 101459
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What I have seen of UBISOFT of late is their 3rd person view

Ghost recon Future Soldier, The Division and now Wildlands all use the same exact viewing perspective, gamestyle and openworlds(Division and Wildlands)

I'll have to be impressed to get this one. But I will see what the reviews say. Kinda sad when you own 3 games with the same exact style of game play in basic design.

 

 

  • Like 2
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...