Why did you turn Ghost Recon into COD 3rd person?

[GENERALxMAYHEM]

I have owned every Tom Clancy title I loved how Redstorm created fun Tactical shooters in the age of twitch shooters. Redstorm stayed true to this concept even had the first leveling up system with rainbow six lockdown. But they never strayed away from what made Tom Clancy games unique which was it's tactical shooter core. With GRFS you have lost your way.

This game has been in development how long like what 5 years or more 2007 was the last graw and you guys figured hey let's throw out the book of what made us successful and create a 3rd person COD. Well COD is not tactical it's a twitch shooter wearing fatigues. So let me point out the reason why this game is a major letdown.

1. You can't have a tactical shooter with unlockable gun's that doesn't curb the realism of the gun's because you then have to make the gun's equal so the lower level players don't get pwned by the higher level weapons so you water down the guns till they are only really a gun in name only.

Now the old ghost recon and what you advertised this game was to have all the weapons available to us like in every other graw and we could then make them our own in Gunsmith. Instead you give us a mere pittance of weapons that are unbalanced due to the fact only riflemen wear body armor great choice on that. So Engineer's and Recon's are easy picking's very tactical. Oh and you level each class up independently nice choice.

2.The MAPS! WTF why soooo small and all urban? Have the DEV teams even played a ghost recon game before they made this! As a person who spent many, many hours hunting other players in wide open and outdoor maps this is the joy the core value of ghost recon all lost with these unbalanced and spawn campable spawns which was a real nice addition boy I can't tell how many times I said you now what I really enjoy spawn camping or being spawn camped.

3.Why on god's green earth did you bring in suppression to this game just because battlefield added it? if you are gonna add this abomination to video games use it sparingly like only to people who are in cover not anyone just walking around because getting shot at is jarring in real life but this isn't real life and having every player get shell shocked isn't fun. You guys remember the concept of what your fans used to think was fun right?


4. If this is a big Go F yourself to your longtime fans then fine this will be my last Tom Clancy game I buy if not fix this announce that you are gonna release old graw maps and all the weapon's missing from the last two Graw's. Add a body armor option to the other classes or add armor piercing ammo at the start to the other classes it's like this game was thrown together but people who never even played a ghost recon title.

5. The reason the last Tom Clancy game didn't sell so well was an issue of it felt like a map pack and not a new game plus the subject matter was a little controversial so change the subject matter you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater so why did you destroy what made ghost recon special?

6. Does anyone even care about your longtime fans?????????????? or Tactical gaming at all??????

[B3ANTOWN B3A5T]

This game isnt tactical? I guess my squad and I rolling together,watching eachothers backs, capping objectives together,utilizing the different equipment at our disposal to help eachother, or using the waypoint system to call out enemy positions is just noob runNgun tactics.

This game is far more tactical than any COD. This game shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as COD. In call of duty one man can run around the map and lone wolf his team to victory. Try doing that in this game. You will get handled. This is the most anti-lone wolf game I've seen in a while.

I can't comment on old school GR games, because I didn't play any, but that doesn't mean I am a stranger to tactical gaming (longtime Socom player).

I agree about the maps though, we need more woodland type environments. While I like 90% of the maps, I would definitely like to see more foliage. Hopefully arctic strike brings home the Bacon.

[GeX4212]

1. All the guns are pretty balanced my highest level is almost a lvl 40 rifleman and I'm just starting my scout and engineer and I have no trouble dropping people of higher levels
2. The maps are of decent sizes...this game is more objective based and its already annoying have to respawn on the other side of map when the objective is on opposite end. Any bigger and 90% of the game would be Scout's sniping and cloaking
3. Suppression is really not a problem if u move from cover to cover. Suppression is a nice feature because you are providing cover fire for your teammates.
4. If u dont wanna play then don't
5 You're right
6. It is tactical is really team based because one person can not win a game alone...

[MrSndmn7772007]

The consumer is trying to turn Ghost Recon into COD, not Ubi. Hell I see it every night, what with all the imbeciles running around, trying to get kills while the objective is being taken, then wonder why they're all on the bottom of the match leaderboard.

Then there's the people that come on the forum trying to get every single gun nerfed except for the one they love to play with, so the game can be catered to them and their play style. Yeah... Ubi has nothing to do with the morons who buy the game after its been put out on the market

[AmandaArk]

Nothing like COD crap.....

[Dog 0f War]

I have owned every Tom Clancy title I loved how Redstorm created fun Tactical shooters in the age of twitch shooters. Redstorm stayed true to this concept even had the first leveling up system with rainbow six lockdown. But they never strayed away from what made Tom Clancy games unique which was it's tactical shooter core. With GRFS you have lost your way.

This game has been in development how long like what 5 years or more 2007 was the last graw and you guys figured hey let's throw out the book of what made us successful and create a 3rd person COD. Well COD is not tactical it's a twitch shooter wearing fatigues. So let me point out the reason why this game is a major letdown.

1. You can't have a tactical shooter with unlockable gun's that doesn't curb the realism of the gun's because you then have to make the gun's equal so the lower level players don't get pwned by the higher level weapons so you water down the guns till they are only really a gun in name only.

Now the old ghost recon and what you advertised this game was to have all the weapons available to us like in every other graw and we could then make them our own in Gunsmith. Instead you give us a mere pittance of weapons that are unbalanced due to the fact only riflemen wear body armor great choice on that. So Engineer's and Recon's are easy picking's very tactical. Oh and you level each class up independently nice choice.

2.The MAPS! WTF why soooo small and all urban? Have the DEV teams even played a ghost recon game before they made this! As a person who spent many, many hours hunting other players in wide open and outdoor maps this is the joy the core value of ghost recon all lost with these unbalanced and spawn campable spawns which was a real nice addition boy I can't tell how many times I said you now what I really enjoy spawn camping or being spawn camped.

3.Why on god's green earth did you bring in suppression to this game just because battlefield added it? if you are gonna add this abomination to video games use it sparingly like only to people who are in cover not anyone just walking around because getting shot at is jarring in real life but this isn't real life and having every player get shell shocked isn't fun. You guys remember the concept of what your fans used to think was fun right?


4. If this is a big Go F yourself to your longtime fans then fine this will be my last Tom Clancy game I buy if not fix this announce that you are gonna release old graw maps and all the weapon's missing from the last two Graw's. Add a body armor option to the other classes or add armor piercing ammo at the start to the other classes it's like this game was thrown together but people who never even played a ghost recon title.

5. The reason the last Tom Clancy game didn't sell so well was an issue of it felt like a map pack and not a new game plus the subject matter was a little controversial so change the subject matter you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater so why did you destroy what made ghost recon special?

6. Does anyone even care about your longtime fans?????????????? or Tactical gaming at all??????
Poor soul....he know nothing about tactics. :(

[MrSndmn7772007]

Poor sole....he know nothing about tactics. :(

^My thoughts exactly

[WOLFE-MAN]

Poor sole....he know nothing about tactics. :(

Sole = the bottom of your foot. Soul is what you're looking for......................... just saying. ;)

[shotpower]

I'm more pissed about how they've dumped the other modes and given us the garbage guerilla mode.

[MrSndmn7772007]

Sole = the bottom of your foot. Soul is what you're looking for......................... just saying. ;)

Heil ze grammar nazi!

[odi0n2009]

This game isnt tactical? I guess my squad and I rolling together,watching eachothers backs, capping objectives together,utilizing the different equipment at our disposal to help eachother, or using the waypoint system to call out enemy positions is just noob runNgun tactics.

This game is far more tactical than any COD. This game shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as COD. In call of duty one man can run around the map and lone wolf his team to victory. Try doing that in this game. You will get handled. This is the most anti-lone wolf game I've seen in a while.

I can't comment on old school GR games, because I didn't play any, but that doesn't mean I am a stranger to tactical gaming (longtime Socom player).

I agree about the maps though, we need more woodland type environments. While I like 90% of the maps, I would definitely like to see more foliage. Hopefully arctic strike brings home the Bacon.

This^^^

[AnArmyOfOne]

I have owned every Tom Clancy title I loved how Redstorm created fun Tactical shooters in the age of twitch shooters. Redstorm stayed true to this concept even had the first leveling up system with rainbow six lockdown. But they never strayed away from what made Tom Clancy games unique which was it's tactical shooter core. With GRFS you have lost your way.

This game has been in development how long like what 5 years or more 2007 was the last graw and you guys figured hey let's throw out the book of what made us successful and create a 3rd person COD. Well COD is not tactical it's a twitch shooter wearing fatigues. So let me point out the reason why this game is a major letdown.

1. You can't have a tactical shooter with unlockable gun's that doesn't curb the realism of the gun's because you then have to make the gun's equal so the lower level players don't get pwned by the higher level weapons so you water down the guns till they are only really a gun in name only.

Now the old ghost recon and what you advertised this game was to have all the weapons available to us like in every other graw and we could then make them our own in Gunsmith. Instead you give us a mere pittance of weapons that are unbalanced due to the fact only riflemen wear body armor great choice on that. So Engineer's and Recon's are easy picking's very tactical. Oh and you level each class up independently nice choice.

2.The MAPS! WTF why soooo small and all urban? Have the DEV teams even played a ghost recon game before they made this! As a person who spent many, many hours hunting other players in wide open and outdoor maps this is the joy the core value of ghost recon all lost with these unbalanced and spawn campable spawns which was a real nice addition boy I can't tell how many times I said you now what I really enjoy spawn camping or being spawn camped.

3.Why on god's green earth did you bring in suppression to this game just because battlefield added it? if you are gonna add this abomination to video games use it sparingly like only to people who are in cover not anyone just walking around because getting shot at is jarring in real life but this isn't real life and having every player get shell shocked isn't fun. You guys remember the concept of what your fans used to think was fun right?


4. If this is a big Go F yourself to your longtime fans then fine this will be my last Tom Clancy game I buy if not fix this announce that you are gonna release old graw maps and all the weapon's missing from the last two Graw's. Add a body armor option to the other classes or add armor piercing ammo at the start to the other classes it's like this game was thrown together but people who never even played a ghost recon title.

5. The reason the last Tom Clancy game didn't sell so well was an issue of it felt like a map pack and not a new game plus the subject matter was a little controversial so change the subject matter you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater so why did you destroy what made ghost recon special?

6. Does anyone even care about your longtime fans?????????????? or Tactical gaming at all??????


I personally don't like when COD and BF get thrown out there so often but the game does feel like Ubisoft worked with EA to make COD Future Soldiers. The game is just a 3rd person version.

[Darth_Ravenous]

I have owned every Tom Clancy title I loved how Redstorm created fun Tactical shooters in the age of twitch shooters. Redstorm stayed true to this concept even had the first leveling up system with rainbow six lockdown. But they never strayed away from what made Tom Clancy games unique which was it's tactical shooter core. With GRFS you have lost your way.

This game has been in development how long like what 5 years or more 2007 was the last graw and you guys figured hey let's throw out the book of what made us successful and create a 3rd person COD. Well COD is not tactical it's a twitch shooter wearing fatigues. So let me point out the reason why this game is a major letdown.

1. You can't have a tactical shooter with unlockable gun's that doesn't curb the realism of the gun's because you then have to make the gun's equal so the lower level players don't get pwned by the higher level weapons so you water down the guns till they are only really a gun in name only.

Now the old ghost recon and what you advertised this game was to have all the weapons available to us like in every other graw and we could then make them our own in Gunsmith. Instead you give us a mere pittance of weapons that are unbalanced due to the fact only riflemen wear body armor great choice on that. So Engineer's and Recon's are easy picking's very tactical. Oh and you level each class up independently nice choice.

2.The MAPS! WTF why soooo small and all urban? Have the DEV teams even played a ghost recon game before they made this! As a person who spent many, many hours hunting other players in wide open and outdoor maps this is the joy the core value of ghost recon all lost with these unbalanced and spawn campable spawns which was a real nice addition boy I can't tell how many times I said you now what I really enjoy spawn camping or being spawn camped.

3.Why on god's green earth did you bring in suppression to this game just because battlefield added it? if you are gonna add this abomination to video games use it sparingly like only to people who are in cover not anyone just walking around because getting shot at is jarring in real life but this isn't real life and having every player get shell shocked isn't fun. You guys remember the concept of what your fans used to think was fun right?


4. If this is a big Go F yourself to your longtime fans then fine this will be my last Tom Clancy game I buy if not fix this announce that you are gonna release old graw maps and all the weapon's missing from the last two Graw's. Add a body armor option to the other classes or add armor piercing ammo at the start to the other classes it's like this game was thrown together but people who never even played a ghost recon title.

5. The reason the last Tom Clancy game didn't sell so well was an issue of it felt like a map pack and not a new game plus the subject matter was a little controversial so change the subject matter you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater so why did you destroy what made ghost recon special?

6. Does anyone even care about your longtime fans?????????????? or Tactical gaming at all??????

Completely agree with everything you mentioned, as does every single person on my friends list and my entire clan (and we are all long-time GR fans). I can't find a single person in real life who actually likes this horrible game.

Some people on this thread seem to be confusing 'tactical' with 'team-based'. Yes, you need some teamwork to complete the objectives (just as you do in a sports game), but this game isn't even remotely close to a true tactical experience. The ridiculously tiny maps make any realism impossible. In a true tactical game, you would have the breathing room to flank far and wide around the maps, and approach objectives from a variety of vectors and distances, just as you could in all previous GR games. In a realistic tactical game, you would never have this goofy cover system that destroys all realism completely. In a realistic tactical game, you would have the option to disable 3rd person. You could easily do all of this stuff in GRAW/GRAW2, and you can do none of it in GRFS.

This game is an embarrassment and a disgrace, and it will definitely be the last Tom Clancy game for a lot of us long-time GR fans. Ubisoft is quite clearly trying to appeal to a different style of gamer than the players who loved the truly immersive tactical experience of games like GR1 and GRAW, and anyone who can't admit this is out of their mind.

[Dog 0f War]

Sole = the bottom of your foot. Soul is what you're looking for......................... just saying. ;)
Yes you are correct!
And in the end it does not matter........:p

[JediMonkeyxDoWx]

Great game and certainly been playing it tactically with my mates. Agree that the maps could be somewhat larger in future DLC but for everything that it is, and its not SOCOM (whatever that is) nor is it GRAW, its a superb playable game.

[DMTdust]

This game is still plenty tactical.

What this thread is really about, you can't please all of the people all of the time. I loved the old games and would have loved a rehash, but you get tons of people complaining about other developers cranking out the same game over and over again. It is a valid point, IMO. Sometimes you have to move on.

[spartan117b2008]

Completely agree with everything you mentioned, as does every single person on my friends list and my entire clan (and we are all long-time GR fans). I can't find a single person in real life who actually likes this horrible game.

Some people on this thread seem to be confusing 'tactical' with 'team-based'. Yes, you need some teamwork to complete the objectives (just as you do in a sports game), but this game isn't even remotely close to a true tactical experience. The ridiculously tiny maps make any realism impossible. In a true tactical game, you would have the breathing room to flank far and wide around the maps, and approach objectives from a variety of vectors and distances, just as you could in all previous GR games. In a realistic tactical game, you would never have this goofy cover system that destroys all realism completely. In a realistic tactical game, you would have the option to disable 3rd person. You could easily do all of this stuff in GRAW/GRAW2, and you can do none of it in GRFS.

This game is an embarrassment and a disgrace, and it will definitely be the last Tom Clancy game for a lot of us long-time GR fans. Ubisoft is quite clearly trying to appeal to a different style of gamer than the players who loved the truly immersive tactical experience of games like GR1 and GRAW, and anyone who can't admit this is out of their mind.

Definition of Tactical:

1.
of tactics: relating to or involving tactics
2.
as means to end: done or made for the purpose of trying to achieve an immediate or short-term goal
3.
showing skillful planning: showing skillful planning in order to accomplish something


So when me and my friends work together to achieve the objectives in the game which would be a "short term goal" thats not being tactical?So when me and my friend distract an entire team and have a couple more friends flank them from behind thats not being tactical?

Look, if you don't like the game, don't play it. You ever wonder why games these days make them like COD? BECAUSE IT SELLS. Why does it sell? Because as much as I hate to admit it, its what the majority of consumers want. Its a business, they are in it to make money, that simple. If people would stop buying COD games, then people would stop making COD clones. But lets face it, thats not happening any time soon, if ever.

[Bl4ckD3tH]

I'm with the OP ubi doesnt care that's why they havent released a rainbow 6 since the vegas 2 debacle. To those of you that think this game is tactical never played a real clancy game and should stuff it because you dont know wtf you are speaking of. Socom tactical, really? rouge spear and ravenshield along with ogr made socom look like kids play, an im not talking about the console garbage that ubi released either.

[Jordio99]

*Read the title*.
They didn't.

[WOLFE-MAN]

Heil ze grammar nazi!

Someone has to do it, that's what separates us from the animals! :p

[WOLFE-MAN]

Yes you are correct!
And in the end it does not matter........:p

That's true! :-)

[Xx__O-dog__xX]

Great game and certainly been playing it tactically with my mates. Agree that the maps could be somewhat larger in future DLC but for everything that it is, and its not SOCOM (whatever that is) nor is it GRAW, its a superb playable game.

Did you just ask what Socom is... Arrrrffffff. You should get smacked for that one.

[MrSndmn7772007]

Someone has to do it, that's what separates us from the animals! :p

No it separates the tools from the other people who knew what he meant but didn't feel the need to correct him.

And my cat can't put a simple sentence together, let alone know the difference between sole and soul.

[DMTdust]

If I misuse the language anywhere, please feel free to correct me. I have a professional life outside of video games, and I would hate to form bad habits.

[d3monhunt3r96]

Question: why did you turn ghost recon into cod third person?
Answer: we didn't. When was the last cod game you could hand out ammo, dive roll, get into cover, has a cover system for that matter, use optical camo, throw sensor grenades, customize the gas system, trigger,stock,sidebarrel,ammunition,Nd barrel in a gun, customize headgear, have different classes, have people play the objective, have no team deathmatch (thank god), have decisions points or respec tokens which is not like prestiging at all, have suppression, mark targets, have an or scanner, have a stun gun, have a stun mine, have a coordination dial, have a squad, have squad spawns, have non linear non boring maps without paper flying everywhere, have semi realistic gunplay and guns, have pilot able ucav drones, and driving drones, have sync shots, have intelligent ai, have an alternate spawn in case of spawn camping, have actually effective shotguns and sniper rifles, no quick scoping, no drop shotting, and a game where you can actually have tactical gameplay.

[d3monhunt3r96]

I can't find a single person in real life who actually likes this horrible game.
I like this game

[Darth_Ravenous]

So when me and my friends work together to achieve the objectives in the game which would be a "short term goal" thats not being tactical?So when me and my friend distract an entire team and have a couple more friends flank them from behind thats not being tactical?

That's not really any different than playing a football game. Would you call a football game truly "tactical"? Your extremely narrow definition does not make for a true tactical military shooter, and I think a part of you knows that, even if you can't admit it.

As I said before, the maps are WAY too small to do anything but extremely limited tactics, and the utter lack of variety in those maps makes the tactical gameplay horribly redundant. It is so bad that it is almost funny. Throw in the ridiculously unrealistic cover system and you have one of the most pathetic "tactical" games ever made. It's a joke.

Previous Ghost Recon games ALWAYS gave you a variety of large, tactical maps to facilitate the realism of playing an actual special forces squad. Whether you were trying to complete specific objectives or just trying to eliminate enemy forces, you could approach these maps in a variety of tactical ways, and the sheer size of the maps was one of the essential elements that made those tactics believable. That's all we asked for, and instead of giving us that, Ubisoft just gave us the finger.

It's not like OGR was the Game of the Year or anything, right? Oh, wait...


You ever wonder why games these days make them like COD? BECAUSE IT SELLS. Why does it sell? Because as much as I hate to admit it, its what the majority of consumers want. Its a business, they are in it to make money, that simple. If people would stop buying COD games, then people would stop making COD clones. But lets face it, thats not happening any time soon, if ever.

It's this corporate mindset that is taking over everything these days. They intentionally dumb-down games to try to appeal to the widest possible audience (for pure greed), but in the process they lose what is so unique and enjoyable about the original games. I've seen it happen with a handful of my favorite game franchises: the sequels/later games become mockeries of their former selves.

The recurring problem with this strategy is that the developers not only completely betray their original fans (and eventually lose them permanently), but they ALSO fail to live up to the games that they are trying to emulate. So they fail on both levels. Just look what happened with The Old Republic. It's the exact same thing. Bioware tried to capture the attention of the WoW crowd, at the cost of losing all of the hardcore KotOR fans who play on the console. And just like with Ubisoft, they completely failed to capitalize on that new crowd, and in the process they lost many of their long-time players. And also just like Ubisoft, if Bioware just had the foresight to stay true to their previous game (that was wildly successful, by the way, much like OGR and GRAW), then they wouldn't be scratching their heads right about now trying to figure out how they could have failed so miserably. You have corporate suits making the decisions instead of actual players who understood what made the original games so unbelievably good.

It's blind corporate greed that leads to such a foolish strategy. They ONLY see the potential for the short-term profit, and fail to see how this will damage their reputation in the long-term. This is why GRFS is so bad. It is a corporate-driven, mass-marketed piece of garbage that is nowhere near as good as the earlier GR games.

[mnemiki]

Anyone for GRFS? :D

[SinGamingZone]

Well, this game is nothing like Call of Duty. Here's why.

CoD

Contains TPS, but it's mainly FPS.
No tactical gameplay, typical "run and gun" gameplay even if You have objectives, like in HQ, mostly it's all about killing each other.
No deep customization on guns and character.
CoD doesn't have any cover system, this game has an awesome one.
CoD doesn't have classes, You can set Your primary things like sniper and You have bush gear, but that's all.
CoD doesn't have unique gadgets that will determine the outcome of the match. The have only grenades and claymores.
CoD doesn't have data hacks and intel requirement. It only has UAV and Counter-UAV.
CoD doesn't have a "route calculator" or how You want to call it, which tells You where the objectives are, or where Your hacked teammate is.
CoD is not a tactical game, even in TDM, everyone plays on his/her own, with really low care about the others, everyone cares about their stats only.
CoD sometimes becomes a bunnyhopper game, this game doesn't have the ability to do that, less "ridicolous movement" from the panicing players.
Last, but not least my personal opinion, CoD didn't release an original game since CoD 5: World at War. The games since then became the same. CoD 6 = CoD 4 with better graphics, CoD 7 = CoD 6 with other single player story and a few other weapons and features (really few). MW3 = MW2 with different story and 1-2 few weapons. And now Black Ops 2, probably will be the same as Black Ops 1.

At least Ubisoft does something new, gives us an original idea, a whole new thing, CoD is pretty much the same since CoD 5 as I said. No improvements. The games after CoD 5 could have been DLCs for CoD 4. Would have been a more practical idea.

But my point:

This game is NOTHING like CoD. You can't compare a RUN AND GUN game with a TACTICAL TPS / FPS game. This game is original, new, fresh and interesting. CoD is not.
You probably doesn't agree with me in any points, but my points are still valid.

Best wishes,
Sinful

[Darth_Ravenous]

Question: why did you turn ghost recon into cod third person?
Answer: we didn't. When was the last cod game you could hand out ammo, dive roll, get into cover, has a cover system for that matter, use optical camo, throw sensor grenades, customize the gas system, trigger,stock,sidebarrel,ammunition,Nd barrel in a gun, customize headgear, have different classes, have people play the objective, have no team deathmatch (thank god), have decisions points or respec tokens which is not like prestiging at all, have suppression, mark targets, have an or scanner, have a stun gun, have a stun mine, have a coordination dial, have a squad, have squad spawns, have non linear non boring maps without paper flying everywhere, have semi realistic gunplay and guns, have pilot able ucav drones, and driving drones, have sync shots, have intelligent ai, have an alternate spawn in case of spawn camping, have actually effective shotguns and sniper rifles, no quick scoping, no drop shotting, and a game where you can actually have tactical gameplay.

Virtually all of that is just gimmicky crap that does nothing to make the game actually FUN.

We never needed stun guns or some absurdly unrealistic cover system to make GRAW 2 fun. The extremely wide variety of maps and gameplay options (e.g. disable drone, 1st or 3rd person, etc.) were what made that game so fun to play tactically. The excellent array of options allowed you to be able to play GRAW 2 in whatever specific way you wanted, thus making everyone happy.

In GRFS, literally all of the most useful options are completely gone, along with anything even resembling a decent map. It is one of the most boring shooters of all-time.

[CMV74]

I have owned every Tom Clancy title I loved how Redstorm created fun Tactical shooters in the age of twitch shooters. Redstorm stayed true to this concept even had the first leveling up system with rainbow six lockdown. But they never strayed away from what made Tom Clancy games unique which was it's tactical shooter core. With GRFS you have lost your way.

This game has been in development how long like what 5 years or more 2007 was the last graw and you guys figured hey let's throw out the book of what made us successful and create a 3rd person COD. Well COD is not tactical it's a twitch shooter wearing fatigues. So let me point out the reason why this game is a major letdown.

1. You can't have a tactical shooter with unlockable gun's that doesn't curb the realism of the gun's because you then have to make the gun's equal so the lower level players don't get pwned by the higher level weapons so you water down the guns till they are only really a gun in name only.

Now the old ghost recon and what you advertised this game was to have all the weapons available to us like in every other graw and we could then make them our own in Gunsmith. Instead you give us a mere pittance of weapons that are unbalanced due to the fact only riflemen wear body armor great choice on that. So Engineer's and Recon's are easy picking's very tactical. Oh and you level each class up independently nice choice.

2.The MAPS! WTF why soooo small and all urban? Have the DEV teams even played a ghost recon game before they made this! As a person who spent many, many hours hunting other players in wide open and outdoor maps this is the joy the core value of ghost recon all lost with these unbalanced and spawn campable spawns which was a real nice addition boy I can't tell how many times I said you now what I really enjoy spawn camping or being spawn camped.

3.Why on god's green earth did you bring in suppression to this game just because battlefield added it? if you are gonna add this abomination to video games use it sparingly like only to people who are in cover not anyone just walking around because getting shot at is jarring in real life but this isn't real life and having every player get shell shocked isn't fun. You guys remember the concept of what your fans used to think was fun right?


4. If this is a big Go F yourself to your longtime fans then fine this will be my last Tom Clancy game I buy if not fix this announce that you are gonna release old graw maps and all the weapon's missing from the last two Graw's. Add a body armor option to the other classes or add armor piercing ammo at the start to the other classes it's like this game was thrown together but people who never even played a ghost recon title.

5. The reason the last Tom Clancy game didn't sell so well was an issue of it felt like a map pack and not a new game plus the subject matter was a little controversial so change the subject matter you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater so why did you destroy what made ghost recon special?

6. Does anyone even care about your longtime fans?????????????? or Tactical gaming at all??????

i agree i played the "beta" but I have not yet bouth the game for this reasons...first of all the maps, then the killcam and the optical camo..

[d3monhunt3r96]

Virtually all of that is just gimmicky crap that does nothing to make the game actually FUN.

We never needed stun guns or some absurdly unrealistic cover system to make GRAW 2 fun. The extremely wide variety of maps and gameplay options (e.g. disable drone, 1st or 3rd person, etc.) were what made that game so fun to play tactically. The excellent array of options allowed you to be able to play GRAW 2 in whatever specific way you wanted, thus making everyone happy.

In GRFS, literally all of the most useful options are completely gone, along with anything even resembling a decent map. It is one of the most boring shooters of all-time.
So changing from third to first person and disabling ucav isn't gimmicky crap, but gun customization and a cover system is??? There was a cover system in GRAW2's single player and that worked just fine

[Darth_Ravenous]

So changing from third to first person and disabling ucav isn't gimmicky crap, but gun customization and a cover system is???

How is having the OPTION to play in 1st or 3rd person gimmicky? That makes absolutely no sense. I suppose you think the OPTION for left-handed controls or Legacy controls are gimmicky too, right?

Furthermore, the gun customization in GRFS isn't even in the Guerilla or Co-op modes... why?

And yes, the unrealistic cover system (among other things in GRFS) is pure gimmicky crap, specifically designed to make it easier for idiots to play the game.


There was a cover system in GRAW2's single player and that worked just fine

Of course it works. It allows you to see over objects and align your shot without exposing yourself. But it isn't even remotely realistic, and fortunately it did not exist in the GRAW adversarial combat OR the awesome co-op missions. What part of that are you not understanding?

[d3monhunt3r96]

I just think everyone is too quick to judge everything about this game because ubisoft did something different. If you don't like it, that's fine, go play grab 2 and write a letter to ubisoft, but don't ruin the forums for everyone who wants to talk about the game and not whine
Edit: graw2 not grab 2 :)

[merlindegr8]

I just think everyone is too quick to judge everything about this game because ubisoft did something different. If you don't like it, that's fine, go play grab 2 and write a letter to ubisoft, but don't ruin the forums for everyone who wants to talk about the game and not whine
Edit: graw2 not grab 2 :)

I absolutly disagree whole heartedly. The best way to let them know the direction of this game pisses us off is in these forums. Dont read the threads that you don't agree with. Its almost always clear the direction the thread is going to take by the title...If you dont like it YOU leave the forum...I have sold my copy of this game but am so disappointed because Ghost Recon has been my favorite series since the dreamcast...I waited literally years for this game and want it known how disappointed I am. This disappoints more than my Patriots losing the superbowl because I know how much enjoyment I had from past versions ajd the longevity of those prior games due to diverse and expansive multiplayer content.

[d3monhunt3r96]

Actually, which do you think ubisoft pays more attention to? Their inbox or their forums? Really. You don't even own the game, why are YOU on the forums?
Edit: ghost recon has also been my favorite, I played every game since the original ghost recon and IMO I'm glad they changed it up.

[merlindegr8]

Actually, which do you think ubisoft pays more attention to? Their inbox or their forums? Really. You don't even own the game, why are YOU on the forums?

If you read the post I said I SOLD it which means I HAD it. I am entitled to post. s I gave them my money to begin with. Who are you to say who may and may not post or comment. Are you the Forum Mod. No you are not. In fact the REAL forum mod has made it clear to me as well as to others that we are able to post disenting opinions as long as we stay on topic, which is this game I believe.

[d3monhunt3r96]

If you read the post I said I SOLD it which means I HAD it. I am entitled to post. s I gave them my money to begin with. Who are you to say who may and may not post or comment. Are you the Forum Mod. No you are not. In fact the REAL forum mod has made it clear to me as well as to others that we are able to post disenting opinions as long as we stay on topic, which is this game I believe.
If you read the post I asked why never did I say you couldn't post, and I said you don't own the game not you didn't own the game, settle down buddy I'm just expressing my opinion which just so happens to dissagree with yours

[Mace556]

Look, if you don't like the game, don't play it. You ever wonder why games these days make them like COD? BECAUSE IT SELLS. Why does it sell? Because as much as I hate to admit it, its what the majority of consumers want. Its a business, they are in it to make money, that simple. If people would stop buying COD games, then people would stop making COD clones. But lets face it, thats not happening any time soon, if ever.

They have to obey the shareholders and they all know that 99% of the masses are virtually braindead mongoloids who can barely play CoD-ish games (all genres), that's also why WoW became boring garbage, that's why BF3 will officially become BattleROOM: Mongoloid Warfare 3 next month with the new DLC, and that's why Ghost Recon is now nothing but a pathetic CoD-ified 3rd person garbage product where spraying for headshots is as easy as stealing a lolly from a kid.

We can blame nobody for this but the dumbed down masses...but even that would be a waste of time...

[ArmyRanger6]

Completely agree with everything you mentioned, as does every single person on my friends list and my entire clan (and we are all long-time GR fans). I can't find a single person in real life who actually likes this horrible game.

Some people on this thread seem to be confusing 'tactical' with 'team-based'. Yes, you need some teamwork to complete the objectives (just as you do in a sports game), but this game isn't even remotely close to a true tactical experience. The ridiculously tiny maps make any realism impossible. In a true tactical game, you would have the breathing room to flank far and wide around the maps, and approach objectives from a variety of vectors and distances, just as you could in all previous GR games. In a realistic tactical game, you would never have this goofy cover system that destroys all realism completely. In a realistic tactical game, you would have the option to disable 3rd person. You could easily do all of this stuff in GRAW/GRAW2, and you can do none of it in GRFS.

This game is an embarrassment and a disgrace, and it will definitely be the last Tom Clancy game for a lot of us long-time GR fans. Ubisoft is quite clearly trying to appeal to a different style of gamer than the players who loved the truly immersive tactical experience of games like GR1 and GRAW, and anyone who can't admit this is out of their mind.



Yes they are appealing to a more casual crowd; the GR core gameplay is no longer there.

[Bertnell]

I have always loved GR. This game has always been the purist form of tactical military shooter. I also like the game and think it has taken a few steps forward. However in a vein attempt to broaden the appeal of this game to the COD MW, Balltefield, MH set, it has taken some steps back.
A. The sharp razor edged style graphics have been given up for a more COD/MH style graphics. Honiestly its not quite there and is no comparison to Battlefield. Is this a step in the right direction, YES, did they hit the bullseye, NO.
B. Online play, lets face it more gamers are online now then any server can handle. GR has never experienced this kind of traffic and its going to take time for the engineers to catch up to the volume of gamers online. The reaseon more gamers are playing online is the COD/ Battlefield style game types. In the past open server CO-OP was a big part of online play for GR. That does not exist, YET, I hope to see it soon.
C.Campaign, I'm sure some GR faithful like the new cut scene run and gun COD style of game play. Personally, I Hate IT This is GR its not about running and gunning its about sand lot style tatctical mission objective completion. To me the ending was the worst of all! I mean am i playing COD, Battlefield, MH or GR? I never want to see this style of game play in a GR game EVER again.
D. Gunsmith, this is awsome! nuff said.

Finally, is this game better then GR AW, in some ways it is. However, for me, a gamer who still plays GR, GR Island Thunder, and AW, this game has move to far into the realm of COD and Battlefield. Will I continue to play it YES, will I hope they return the game to its roots yes. Its definately not trash or garbage, I think that the COD fanboys upset that its not the next COD.
P.S. I looking for some guys to do the CO-OP in Elite, do it by myself if I have to but its more fun with real gamers.

[Neophoenix78]

Take a bite out of Splinter Cell. Sneaking aspect. Another bite from R6V. Cover system. A bite from Battlefield 3. Suppression. A bite from Call of Duty. Weapon Unlocks due to level increase. Take a bite from Army of Two. Conflict game mode. Take a bite from Ghost Recon....... Last man standing .....No...Sharpshooter.... No.... Co-Op side missions......no... Ability to alter options (drone, POV)....no.....Ability for any class to use any weapon.....no......vast amount of weapons to use..... no..Scott Mitchell.... YESSSSSS... Now after all those bites just stick your finger down your throat and throw up. And that is the birth of GRFS. An amalgamation of all the other TC games from the past (except Hawx. Even that branch was too horrible to incorporate in GRFS) with parts of the other popular competition's titles. I cannot wait for the title after the new Rainbow Six. It will be called Tom Clancy's. Not a typo. They will abandon each branch in their series to make one combined masterpiece.

Honestly if they wanted to go in a new direction I would be pleased with that. That is not what they did. They went in the direction that everyone else went in and destroyed the originality they had in the Ghost Recon series.

[Supressivefire]

Future Soldier feels like a 3rd person hybrid of Call of Duty and Battlefield 3.

[Mushroomtip4ya]

How is having the OPTION to play in 1st or 3rd person gimmicky? That makes absolutely no sense. I suppose you think the OPTION for left-handed controls or Legacy controls are gimmicky too, right?

Furthermore, the gun customization in GRFS isn't even in the Guerilla or Co-op modes... why?

And yes, the unrealistic cover system (among other things in GRFS) is pure gimmicky crap, specifically designed to make it easier for idiots to play the game.



Of course it works. It allows you to see over objects and align your shot without exposing yourself. But it isn't even remotely realistic, and fortunately it did not exist in the GRAW adversarial combat OR the awesome co-op missions. What part of that are you not understanding?

i dont see how you say cover is unrealistic. are you saying people in real wars dont use bunkers. walls or hell anything they can find to get behind? please explain whats so unrealistic about using cover?

[dsa0224]

lone wolfs' in GRFS are going to spoil MP for many people


1) they get hacked easily via stun runners.
2) now your cant respawn near your team mates
3) forces your team to be more defensive
4) 9 times out of 10 , you will get killed repeatedly..


there are very few things wrong about the MP of GRFS.. there are a lot of things wrong with i-diot gamers out there.

[Darth_Ravenous]

i dont see how you say cover is unrealistic. are you saying people in real wars dont use bunkers. walls or hell anything they can find to get behind? please explain whats so unrealistic about using cover?

I never said anything about using cover being unrealistic. Go back and re-read my post.

I said that the cover SYSTEM in the game is unrealistic, because you can magically see over objects and perfectly line up your shot before ever shouldering your weapon or even exposing your head. It's just a crutch for people that need time to line up their shot.

We never needed this before, and no one ever asked for it. It is just yet one more way the franchise has been drastically changed for no good reason.

[funghost3]

This game isnt tactical? I guess my squad and I rolling together,watching eachothers backs, capping objectives together,utilizing the different equipment at our disposal to help eachother, or using the waypoint system to call out enemy positions is just noob runNgun tactics.

This game is far more tactical than any COD. This game shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as COD. In call of duty one man can run around the map and lone wolf his team to victory. Try doing that in this game. You will get handled. This is the most anti-lone wolf game I've seen in a while.

I can't comment on old school GR games, because I didn't play any, but that doesn't mean I am a stranger to tactical gaming (longtime Socom player).


I agree about the maps though, we need more woodland type environments. While I like 90% of the maps, I would definitely like to see more foliage. Hopefully arctic strike brings home the Bacon.

typical non ghost player who as he sais," he hasnt played any ghost games"
you fail in what you are trying to say because you cannot comment on GRFS against COD if you know sod all about ghost recon and what it really was for 10 years.
another noob who likes 1st person shooters,and knows nothing about what gr really is.

[DVS_Recon_088]

Long time fans?
You keep saying that but you keep comparing the game to the GRAW series.

Ghost Recon Jungle Storm son.

[funghost3]

Long time fans?
You keep saying that but you keep comparing the game to the GRAW series.

Ghost Recon Jungle Storm son.
played all of them i just mention graw 2 as its still living and has all the maps from the others,i loved the first ghost and island thunder etc.played them for years since 2002

[DVS_Recon_088]

played all of them i just mention graw 2 as its still living and has all the maps from the others,i loved the first ghost and island thunder etc.played them for years since 2002
Was replying to OP

[Darth_Ravenous]

played all of them i just mention graw 2 as its still living and has all the maps from the others,i loved the first ghost and island thunder etc.played them for years since 2002

Same here. I love OGR, GRIT, GRAW, and GRAW 2.

I didn't care as much for GR2.

[funghost3]

Same here. I love OGR, GRIT, GRAW, and GRAW 2.

I didn't care as much for GR2.
im age 39 and my bro is 42 and we used to co op all the time on the first ghost on pc.
then all the add ons came and we were in heaven.
now we play graw 2 and can play all the old levels as well!!!!!
can you tell me where that level has gone from ghost with the snow in russia? is it in graw 2,cant seem to find it?

[Darth_Ravenous]

im age 39 and my bro is 42 and we used to co op all the time on the first ghost on pc.
then all the add ons came and we were in heaven.
now we play graw 2 and can play all the old levels as well!!!!!
can you tell me where that level has gone from ghost with the snow in russia? is it in graw 2,cant seem to find it?

Hmm... it's been a while since I've been on there, although with my clan unanimously despising GRFS, we may get back on soon.

To answer your question, I believe there was a throwback map pack for GRAW 2 that included two snow maps, one large and one small (well, "small" by GRAW standards, and utterly MASSIVE by GRFS standards).

[funghost3]

Hmm... it's been a while since I've been on there, although with my clan unanimously despising GRFS, we may get back on soon.

To answer your question, I believe there was a throwback map pack for GRAW 2 that included two snow maps, one large and one small (well, "small" by GRAW standards, and utterly MASSIVE by GRFS standards).

ahhhh it was called red square and i cant find it.wonder why it didnt make it.

[Darth_Ravenous]

ahhhh it was called red square and i cant find it.wonder why it didnt make it.

Red Square?

That was the last mission on OGR.

[funghost3]

Red Square?

That was the last mission on OGR.
yes didnt make it to retail i see on 360.shame i loved that map.it went into a train station if i remember

[Darth_Ravenous]

yes didnt make it to retail i see on 360.shame i loved that map.it went into a train station if i remember

That's too bad. I still have my original disc from 10 years ago.