Gameinformer says 12 player online...what happened to 16 players 8v8? | Forums

[Safrole]

Message from corporate: "Dear Gamers, we discussed what you want, what would make you happy, and we discarded it in favor of a model that would yield more revenue. Sincerely, Ubisoft"

You know that's the cold hard truth. They started drooling a bit while looking at that Activision earnings report and decided cashing in on the TCGR franchise was the best way to get them some of that!

And please don't be so naive as to believe the hardware is what limited the map size. BF3 is a rather glaring example to the contrary. In fact, BF3 without vehicles is twice as "Ghost" as this game. This is "Ghosts Who Detect Each Other as Part of Their Strategy". To quote the illustrious Joe Biden, WORDS MEAN SOMETHING. And the word "ghost" certainly doesn't mean UAVs and red outlines controlling the outcome of the game.

Let me complain about the searchable customized lobbies too. What is their motivation to keep you playing a certain way? What do they get? Standardized play means you can give everyone a rank. You can give them their little gun unlocks. These sparkling trinkets keep you playing the game. I'm 40 yrs old and crotchety; I certainly don't need a childish unlock system. All it's gonna do is keep me from having my guns for two months. They should sell me the total unlock package for $35. If you're an adult and you have money, then you don't have to be treated like a jobless child, right?

Oh well, they may lose us old dinosaurs to Serellans Kickstarter project. We can all play that at the old folk's home.

Unless it's bingo night.

[SWATDIRTYSTEEL]

Well there defiantly is a considerable missing element to Ghost Recon here, and that is the maps. But there are large excuses for this that make a degree of sense. It's obvious they're not trying to push the market too strongly, and that might be a good decision if you spread it out over the next 5 years. If you're looking at it as far as competition goes, it'll put the COD franchise on the side of having to introduce more unique aspects instead of refineing and expanding on the ones previous titles have made. But the sad reality is, tactical shooters, stealth games and related styles are being heavily mixed with gamers who want a here and now style of gameplay. Like number of kills, and explosions every 30 seconds and so on. They don't have their own patience and drive yet to take chances, to screw up and to most importantly make things happen in a game. It sounds incredibly stupid when I write it out, but it's sorta the truth, atleast from my point of view. It's just a game sure, but the style of gameplay is extremely different. So if they want to keep a franchise alive, they might be bending to adhere to the more quick shooting gamer. Tbh I played way to much of that first map in GR when I was younger. I just loved the environment, the patience and Time it took to move from place to place. Setting things up and taking control of areas ect...ect.. It's not here. What's here is an extremely intense in your face game style in close quarters. If you couple this game style, with Ghost Recon's maps for a future release of Ghost recon, you have a brilliant combination. Right now to me GRFS is just grfs. It's fun as hell, but the other aspects are slightly diluted. Whether that is for getting the current gamers up to date on techniques and game styles or some other reasons Idk. But this game isn't a flop, nor a true insult to GR fans. I would suggest mentally hibernating certain wants if you wanted this game to be GR.

Anyhow, it's difficult for them to keep a particular style of gameplay alive, because common.. look at how society and people go. They want. Now.. now... now... gr was never like that for me. It was a unique game...blah..blah.. you get my picture in anycase. To develop the perfect GR game, ..well theres alot that goes into that. Tbh, we can't knock it completely no matter how it goes. Single player and guerilla mode look immensely fun. If they range anywhere like the original GR, it'll be a dose of a potentially great sequel if the fans now keep the idea alive, and encourage features and methods for the developers to work off of.


*edit*

lol, it was an honest question considering when I asked you. Not a child like "do you know what you're talking about" statment trying to trap you mate.. lol...

You know I thought after your first reply I was going to take you off my Christmas Card list and not like you but your dead on with what your saying.

Its almost like though you have accepted the change, and I did as well...after the first day. I played three games and was so disgusted I turned if off and told my buddies "I got to go, I cant believe we waited 5 years for this Spit (-p then +h)" I could only describe my feelings as "disgusted". I grew to like it after I played it like I would have played older RECONs, moving from cover to cover (never really using THEIR cover system) and taking my tactical time with my SWAT mates. I even told myself if they make searchable customizable lobbies we could turn off this crap like in older RECON games and at the least, if we have private rooms like GuRFiS' big brother now, CoD, we could invite all our friends even if they was not SWAT to play old school original style. But now it gets worse with only 6v6. I do not know about the rest of you but 6v6 was hard on GuRFiS' big brother CoD, I was looking forward to going back to 8v8. We already had 6v6 with older RECONs and now GuRFiS' big brother CoD, even had to deal with BF3's 4 man party. I know more people than 5 and I would like to play with my team/squad/clan with as many Teammates as I can.

To go backwards like they have by cutting down the game modes considerably, cutting down the number of maps to 10 and making them smaller more like their big brother CoD, making guns faction specific and forcing us to play one faction over the other with no chance to change sides and not be the POdarks, No searchable customizable lobbies so we can turn of the BS and make our own game that they dont have the stones to make out of fear it will not allow them to upgrade their shiny cars and houses for sake of trying to be like CoD and get CoD money, forcing us to play their version of CoD with UAVs, sensor grenades, hacking intel and always knowing where everyone is, and now taking away the 4 extra players in the game is just making things worse. I will give it to them for upping the party size but if that means taking away from a 8v8 team ( I mean why is there 16 slots in the room in the beta?) then I would rather have the ability in private rooms to have 8v8 but if it will be structured around 12 then our private rooms that we will have to find people to play in so we are not always playing against each other will only be 6v6, then what is there to like about the game now.

I do like your points, I am just not ready to give another dime to these game Developers who try to be like the other guy so much so its like playing either a first person or third person variant of the original, in this case CoD, when Ghost Recon WAS the original but turned to a follower like ALL the other game companies out there. I believe they call that "selling out" except now I am torn if I should get my money back that I have had on the game forever and just save it to buy a game that Ubisoft is trying to be like and in the process completely ruining what they started or just get my money back and use it to pay a bill or something.

But its cool, its whatever....this is just another clone in a long line of clones and I will rejoice in the day some game company grows a pair and says "lets try being different than those other guys trying to be the same as CoD"

Here is Counter Strike GO and Tackdown!

Kudos for them for having the balls to be "different"!

[SWATDIRTYSTEEL]

The only thing "ghosting" right now, is 'Ghost Recon' the franchise. I'm waiting for it to peek out of a bush and kill me because I can't find it.

LOL

You know if you had a hacking device, a UAV, a sensor grenade, or a OTR scanner I bet we both could find it before it bites us in the buttocks.

[SWATDIRTYSTEEL]

Hey Safrole...

I never miss a Bingo night...they have the best punch and pie.

Your so right about everything in post. Its either really sad or hysterical.

I am still trying to hold back the tears to keep from finding out if it is one over the other.

[TRAJEKTURY]

There was no Modern Warfare when GRAW 1 came out , of course there was no UAV on COD. Anyway you made a good point, inadvertantly. Modern Warfare, which as far as I'm concerned is still the best COD to this day, ripped GRAW a new one in terms of sales. So UBI crawled back down their hole and came up w/ Assasin's Creed. They admited defeat (in their world sales apparrently are everything), waved the white flag, like some *****es. Which leads us to today, Future Soldier is an after thought, like oh **** , this could have been good, lets giver her a whurl again. Its never been taken serious enough to be a block buster like MW1 was. Or even be a community classic. Corporate America is ****ed, and apparrently so is corporate France. I don't know how else to explain this stupidity.

[Gagtag1]

Ill be honest I have just accepted it as how it is. It's not particulary my vision of what a ghost recon game would be like. Nor are the things they are so easily taking out, It actually worries me when anyone takes things away that have become a standard. To me it's all a game in a game with what they are doing, and im just not burning my time on it that much. I think at the best it's educating gamers with new age tech and mixing it with tactics. But idk. The lack of features, the incredibly confusing point of having to earn weapons, the map sizes, ... Yar it's strange. I'm really with you anyhow, I just was making the best of what they've made because to me.. They've made this game irregardless of what the older fans whom have actually stayed on these forums have said to them. To add further insult, they've taken features out. When the forum members in bulk say this is stupid, and next to no one defends UBIs decision to keep them out, but they still refuse to bring it in.. I know it's for "reasons". At this point it's a game and a carrot. Future dlc? Maybe they want to control the methodology of gameplay and restrict users from trying any other variation. Hell, maybe they're afraid its too realistic. I really don't know. And that's fine. I never expected this game to be Ghost Recon the sequel to Island Thunder. ... though somewhere deep inside I dreamed of a cool game like that :P

What else can you do.. they are exceptionally distant when it comes to communicating to the forum members that basically constitute a long term fan base. And what does a long term fanbase do for a company? Carry on elements that they can bend in future titles. Expand on things and indirectly through gameplay pass that way of gaming onto new gamers, so the "gameing experience" evolves more rapidly. But what do they really do? They ignore. Again.. for reasons. Moneys the worst traitor to the point of a game. It never was about money, it was about an experience and giving something new for people to enjoy and try. Now it's... Well it's different. Im not sold in anycase, Im just going with the flow. Don't see a point in arguing to air and setting people off whom are more frustrated by the sheer lack of style they wanted.

Communication is a progressive yet dangerous thing. The more they listen to us, the more "power" indirectly they recieve. It's just the respect levels for devs and gamers is so awkward. I've seen threads where people literally are berating these guys. Well lets be honest, they do a job. And that's part of the problem. If they are passionate, and I know they are if they're doing this, then maybe this is just the way they want their game. Too bad they still don't know how to mix developer passion and fan passion, while still respecting the seperation of choice in the end. Meh.. whatever Id kill for a 8v8 game. Two squads working together as a team... would be so ace. But if this is the map style they think is the "standard" for today, then im sorta glad they botched that opportunity up. They must have their reasons cause they're not daft. Just would be nice if those reasons they felt comfortable to openly admit. If it's hardware... say so. Gamers will pounce on that to push for the next gen consoles faster. Or would have held on an extension of this game so it could be released with next gen platforms. If its ideas???? No it cant be that. If it's economics and back door corporate ****? ..ug whatever no comment. If it's ego driven? ... cool. Then be proud of your baby ubisoft, But this isn't exactly how many of the previous GR fans invisioned their GR when the tech was actually there to implement it.

[HEAT_HTX40]

Message from corporate: "Dear Gamers, we discussed what you want, what would make you happy, and we discarded it in favor of a model that would yield more revenue. Sincerely, Ubisoft"

You know that's the cold hard truth. They started drooling a bit while looking at that Activision earnings report and decided cashing in on the TCGR franchise was the best way to get them some of that!

And please don't be so naive as to believe the hardware is what limited the map size. BF3 is a rather glaring example to the contrary. In fact, BF3 without vehicles is twice as "Ghost" as this game. This is "Ghosts Who Detect Each Other as Part of Their Strategy". To quote the illustrious Joe Biden, WORDS MEAN SOMETHING. And the word "ghost" certainly doesn't mean UAVs and red outlines controlling the outcome of the game.

Let me complain about the searchable customized lobbies too. What is their motivation to keep you playing a certain way? What do they get? Standardized play means you can give everyone a rank. You can give them their little gun unlocks. These sparkling trinkets keep you playing the game. I'm 40 yrs old and crotchety; I certainly don't need a childish unlock system. All it's gonna do is keep me from having my guns for two months. They should sell me the total unlock package for $35. If you're an adult and you have money, then you don't have to be treated like a jobless child, right?

Oh well, they may lose us old dinosaurs to Serellans Kickstarter project. We can all play that at the old folk's home.

Unless it's bingo night.

Or Cribbage night...spades....all good times.

[SWATDIRTYSTEEL]

The was no Modern Warfare when GRAW 1 came out , of course there was UAV on COD. Anyway you made a good point, inadvertantly. Modern Warfare, which as far as I'm concerned is still the best COD to this day. Rip GRAW a new one in terms of sales. So UBI crawled back down their hole and came up w/ Assasin's Creed. The admited defeat, waved the white flag, like some *****es. Which leads us to today, Future Soldier is an after thought, like oh **** , this could have been good, lets giver her a whurl again. Its never been taken serious enough to be a block buster like MW1 was. Or even be a community classic. Corporate America is ****ed, and apparrently so is corporate France. I don't know how else to explain this stupidity.

To your first sentence that was my point, GRAW1 brought out UAVs then COD4 MW1 brought them out, and inevitably causing the downward spiral and blocking of another GR title for 5 years.

To the rest of your post, your dead on and I couldn't have said it better myself...
well i could but I am glad you said it.

[SWATDIRTYSTEEL]

Or Cribbage night...spades....all good times.

...dont forget about dominos!

Spades is my game though...I bet I set ya!



...now where is my meds and walking cane?

[Safrole]

The point of unlocking things is to keep your interest, so you always have something to look forward to. Spacing out the DLC is another technique to keep you interested. It's like if your wife said when you got married "We can only do it missionary for the first year" then you'd be like What position do we add for the second year? Maybe 10 years in she'd finally let you... nevermind. But ultimately this game she's playing pisses you off because you're fully aware that she's holding back on purpose, using your own nature against you. This is what they've chosen to do with unlocking, to gun-tease us like we're a bunch of monkeys.