Radical Edward
Member
These scores are not representative of the demo I played.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ghost Recon Wildlands - Review thread
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
Always-honest
Banned
Fucccckkkk, ANOTHER great game??????
I still don't understand why this had to be open world. Would have looked better if it was just different areas and levels. But i did have fun in coop.
I still don't understand why this had to be open world. Would have looked better if it was just different areas and levels. But i did have fun in coop.
I think he asked about bad games
PackAPunchedMick
Member
I can only hope GR gets the same post launch treatment as the division.
Peroroncino
Member
suddenlyissoon
Member
It was a beta. Maybe they fixed it? I'm cautiously optimistic
Out of all these games, I have played FC4, Primal, Division, Unity, and Wildlands beta. And i enjoyed all of them except Unity, Ubi really shit the bed with that one.
Far Cry 4 wasn't as good as FC3, but it was still awesome. Primal took an entirely different route and it worked awesomely. Not only the new direction was great - the visuals of Primal are also amazing.
The Division lacked content but it is easily one of the best co-op experiences available on this gen.
Wildlands with friends is a blast - you can literally complete missions in any way you see fit - Vehicle physics seemed off though
A lot of people weren't sold by the beta - but from what I played the beta came into its own when:
A) you played with friends, and
B) you reached the second area
Reaching the second area in the open beta really kicked things off. It got way harder - better armed enemies, better designed bases, more complex bases, more surveillance and things to avoid.
If the game keeps upping the ante in terms of the dynamics and challenge in each region then I'm not surprised by the good scores. The encounters legit got amazing in the second area.
Glad I've got a code pre-ordered.
This isn't on.
A) you played with friends, and
B) you reached the second area
Reaching the second area in the open beta really kicked things off. It got way harder - better armed enemies, better designed bases, more complex bases, more surveillance and things to avoid.
If the game keeps upping the ante in terms of the dynamics and challenge in each region then I'm not surprised by the good scores. The encounters legit got amazing in the second area.
Glad I've got a code pre-ordered.
This isn't on.
giancarlo123x
Banned
It's fine that you don't like or enjoy the games but these are not bad games at all. I don't like wildlands but reviews say it's pretty good.
Have you not read the beta threads? Outside very few everyone shit as hard as they could on the game, some even saying literally everything is bad about the game. Hell yeah I'm going to make snarky comments about it when it actually reviews well.
If reviews are so pointless why is GAF so up in arms about them all the time?
Every game got its flaws but good lord people are quick to shit on Ubisoft regardless. As for the general? Audience, that's not GAF and from what I saw those who shit posted about it played solo or with ransoms and I'm sorry, but you're kinda missing the entire point of the game by that.
As for your nice list which is all bad games, Horizon is basically taking every Ubi open world formula with better story and refined their mechanics.
So you tell me, are they all bad or not just for you?...
Diprosalic
Banned
this was one of the worst betas i've ever played. really surprised by the scores.
Need a quick summary, what was bad about the beta?
The game is similar to Division, scores similar to Division, so I guess I'll skip it.
Ubisoft knows how to make "good enough" games, but my time is not worth wasting on such a shallow, repetitive and mind-numbing experience. 2 regions was more than enough for me, I cant imagine doing the same for 21...
Ubisoft knows how to make "good enough" games, but my time is not worth wasting on such a shallow, repetitive and mind-numbing experience. 2 regions was more than enough for me, I cant imagine doing the same for 21...
Ubi employee
They are not similar. I wish they were tbh.
Lanrutcon
Member
Whoa whoa. It's really not similar to Division. Seriously: no HP bars, no loot grinding, no instanced dungeons, etc. It's way more of a traditional shooter (pop the dude in the head and he falls over. Done.).
Double and triple standards on this site is quite amazing especially in regards to reviews.
TylerDurden4321
Member
You know, I thought... even if Wildlands worked as intended - designwise as well -, it would still only result in an 82 metacritic.
So, positively surprised (as with most games/reviews this year). Looking forward to reading the Eurogamer review.
So, positively surprised (as with most games/reviews this year). Looking forward to reading the Eurogamer review.
As many others have written, a lot better than I expected. Now, numbers usually doesn't mean much in regards to descrribing a game - but if it is at least indicative of the experience then something must be different from what I experienced in the "beta". It will be interesting to ready through these reviews.
This game has such potential.
This game has such potential.
How is it like Division?
It's made by Ubisoft.
😉
Mister_Bubbles
Member
Another great game? Son of a bitch.
Diprosalic
Banned
buggy, lack of polish
didn't run all that great
A.I is crap
extremely repetitive
controls didn't feel right
just felt like a real beta not a "beta" aka demo. seriously the amount of jank was quite stunning.
Always-honest
Banned
Pffffhaha... okay..
Some people are still stuck in some irrational Ubi hate loop, it seems.
You ARE allowed to have nuanced opinions on games. Don't let ancient hyve-mind destroy your enjoyment of games.
It has guns and coop and it's made by Ubisoft. So, EXACTLY the same. (some people basically don't really play games, it seems.)
Net_Wrecker
Member
Don't even bother. Big Sony exclusive, big Nintendo exclusive, new Nintendo console, big Ubisoft game, miracle niche title, and big Bioware game in the span of a month. This is like the Worst-GAF All Star Game right now. Let it pass.
If you haven't even really played the game then why would you say the bolded? No, the beta does not count.
I don't understand how it's anything like The Division.
FearlessBelgian
Member
9/10 ? Wtf this is a joke ? Gameplay are so bad in this game...
Lanrutcon
Member
Pack it up. The quirky robot has said the beta doesn't count. Retract everything I've said regarding the game.
I'm eagerly waiting my second first contact with the game.
1. yes
2. Not a joke
3. Gameplay needed some tweaks = True, gameplay was bad = False
- Amazingly bad helicopter controls.
- AI "partners" added nothing to the game, instead made the experience worse due to lack of proper commands and acting really badly.
- World felt really dead, unsure why to be honest.
- Car physics was wonky at best, and laughable at times. Driving anywhere was accomplished by just heading off the side of a mountain at no risk at all.
- The cover system lacked stickiness
- For me personally, playing it as a stealth shooter felt utterly worthless due to weird enemy reactions paired with the clunky cover system
Perhaps it was just not for me, I would have loved something along the lines of The Divisions cover system together with less bullet spongyness for both enemies and player characters - making it a tactical high risk high reward shooter. Think the a love child of Far Cry and Rainbow Six.
Reviews don't count for games I want to be shit...
Lol. Truer words have never been uttered
HEY GUYS Let's shit on something we've not played outside of a work in progress beta where we don't know what build version it was either. That seems like a perfectly reasonable basis on which to accuse reviewers of being unprofessional and accepting bribes right?
I wasn't a huge fan of the beta but seriously. Play it yourselves first, by all means then make a judgement. But to say reviews are clearly false / influenced by bribes just because you didn't like a beta version is crazy.
I wasn't a huge fan of the beta but seriously. Play it yourselves first, by all means then make a judgement. But to say reviews are clearly false / influenced by bribes just because you didn't like a beta version is crazy.
That it's an open-world 4 player online coop based shooter where you just follow checkpoints and kill groups of enemies. Narrative is trash and pushed to the background expecting that the players will create their own experiences.
They are different games with different strengths and weaknesses, but the style is similar. Playing coop with 3 others might be fun, but I won't have 3 friends to play with me, so I won't be making the same mistake I did with Division.
Camp Freddie
Member
This. It looks like a fun game in multiplayer, but the controls and AI are poor and the story is utter shit-tier USA#1 meets torture-porn edginess. It also can't decide if it's a serious stealth Ghost Recon game, or a crazy guns-blazing, helicopter-jacking, base-jumping Just Cause game. As a result, both play-styles feel a bit off.
It's not a bad game, but it certainly isn't a great one.
Peroroncino
Member
Division and GR:W open worlds are QUITE different.
And if we're going with the whole '4 player online tps where you follow checkpoints and kill groups of enemies' then GR:W is identical to GR:Future Solider, how great is that!?
The Lone Courier
Member
I guess i'll be picking this up, had a few friends say it was good too.
I'm kinda bummed that I didn't know there's second area in the open beta before it was too late. Played the closed beta with a friend and it had decent groundwork. I can easily see them improving on it while the game progresses. Was excepting the game to be hit with sevens on reviews, but I guess it indeed does improve. Looking forward to picking this up on sales, maybe next summer.