on May 24, 2012
I wanted to try to offer a more critical review than the either glowing 5-stars or completely ignorant 1-stars. I will preface this by saying I got this game for a little less than half price from a friend, the day after release. I will get to the reasoning for that shortly. Game is WELL worth the price I paid, however if I had paid full price...I'm not sure I would feel the same. The lack of matchmaking in Co-Op, and some poor multiplayer choices are what prevents this game from being so much more.
I have not gotten very far into the single player, so I cannot comment too much on it. As others have said the story will definitely not blow you away, but I feel the gameplay is enough to make up for this. The tactical/stealth ability is enjoyable to play, but you can also use a run and gun style of gameplay if that is what you prefer.
Guerrilla mode is an awesome addition. I can't help but love any type of "horde" game mode (zombies/survival/you name it). However, as others have mentioned, the lack of matchmaking for the Co-Op game modes is a HORRENDOUS oversight. There is no justifiable reason to make the Co-Op modes strictly invite only, and is easily deserving of a one star reduction.
Now to the multiplayer. Overall thoroughly addictive and enjoyable gameplay. GR veterans will find that although it is definitely a departure from the series, there are little details that will bring back fond memories. The graphics may be viewed as slightly under par with other recent releases, but the game looks amazing on my screen, and the realism of character movement is impressive. I will say that it is NOT an easy game to play, and those who can't pick up on the style will be smacked around mercilessly. I count this as a pro and a con. I personally love the extensive use of cover style of play, however that is the style you MUST play in. Any thought of not adapting to this style will result in a completely unenjoyable game experience. For those who dig it, you can become a veritable killing machine once you pick it up. Unfortunately, you will find that this style can (sometimes) result in a total deluge of campers, who would rather sit behind a concrete barrier and wait for passersby than to actually get up and go after the objective.
The multiplayer cons are what bring the game down most for me, and also the reason that I was able to get the game so cheaply. In the GRAW games the host was able to choose the map, time limit, and weapon kit. This is gone. I'm sure private games still allow map and time selection, but the kit option is gone entirely. What you get is a choice to vote for one of two maps. Way to dumb it down Ubi. For those who are new to the GR series this may not mean much, but to the veterans, especially from GRAW I and II, this is everything. If you played GRAW II recently you would be lucky to find a sharpshooter (team deathmatch) player game running, but you could ALWAYS find a Pistols Only Blind Siege ranked game. These were/are the hardcore players who still played the game years after release. Kit selection is gone, blind siege is gone, sharpshooter is gone. Some have said that team deathmatch would be added, but why would it not be included in the game upon release? It makes no sense, and leads to one star reviews with people whining about "no team deathmatch?". Some will mock those who say that, but the fact remains that team deathmatch is the industry standard. To leave it out, or to intend for it to be in the game but not upon release, just makes no sense. The load times can also be extremely long at times, and I have had issues with losing connection to the server before loading the lobby and after entering the game.
I will be getting more into the singleplayer and Co-Op modes, and will edit/update this review as necessary. I was really hoping for this game to be a home run, but it is more like a double. Worth checking out, but I would rent or try to check out the gameplay first, so you know what you are buying.
* Update 6/01/2012 *
Single player is a little too linear as compared to previous GR games, but I enjoy it. The rendering of human faces in cut-scenes is really, really poor, as mentioned by others. Like they spent so much time making characters with masks look bad*** that they completely forgot about those not wearing masks or helmets.
I love the multiplayer experience in this game, however, major server issues are dragging it down. Almost constant issues with losing connection to servers, host migrations, lobbies that won't start, and lag that is absolutely ridiculous. I've shot a guy with two full clips who didn't even seem to notice my presence, and then he dies ten seconds later. No exaggeration. Hopefully they will get these issues ironed out in the coming weeks. It should also be pointed out that the info on Amazon states 16 player multiplayer or 8v8, when this is not the case; the multiplayer is 12 maximum.
on May 22, 2012
I recommend those who are tired of COD and/or Battlefield to invest the money for TC's Ghost Recon FS. I took a gamble on buying it and so far I am not at all disappointed. This game is so refreshing to play and so different compared to the senseless run and gun monotony of the latter games. Although this game claims to be more tactical than it actually is, you will not be disappointed with the campaign. I cannot really say too much on multiplayer or guerrilla mode since I haven't played them yet, however I would definitely give the game a solid 8.5/10 when it comes to fun and game play.
Some comments on the campaign. The story is pretty dull and lacks a decent plot or captivating dialogue, but this is easily overcome by the game play and style. It keeps you engaged and wanting to perform better in each situation. You can play each situation as tactical as possible, or simply barge in guns blazing where allowed. Certain levels will make you play tactically in which you cannot reveal yourself (which honestly just makes it way more exciting).
In terms of the difficulty of the game, I would have to say it was fairly easy. I played Veteran mode (which is medium in this game) and was able to complete it within 10 hrs. A solid 10 hrs might I add though.
I may have not included too many details on the game itself or its technicalities, but in all honesty pick this one up. You will feel a sigh of relief from all the tension of COD and/ Battlefield, not to mention that it is full 4 player co-op for campaign, guerrilla, and multiplayer.
This just means that if you have friends over your house or friends online who have the game, you will have way more fun playing thru campaign or any other game mode without having to worry about the stuff you have to worry about with other non-coop shooters.
I will admit though that paying $60 may not be fully worth the amount of content in this game, but either way if you are tired of all other FPS out there, you will not feel so burdened letting go of the money. If you do not have that much to front on a game that didn't need millions of dollars to be spent on marketing, then simply wait for used copies at lower prices.
Overall, this game is an excellent, fun, co-op, TPMS (third person military shooter) that will not let you down. You will probably end up playing through the campaign once by yourself and then multiple times with friends since it only gets more fun and satisfying as you get better.
on May 22, 2012
You can't compare this game to CoD, Battlefield or really any other FPS. If you absolutely need a comparison, it's a less sci-fi version of Gears mixed with a dash of SOCOM.
The controls are excellent, the campaign is lengthy enough - 8 hours in but don't know how much more is left.
Guerrilla mode is fantastic - different missions on each map, with up to 4 player co-op. Difficulties range from Recruit (easy) to Veteran (medium) and Elite (hard). I would start with Recruit if you're new to the Ghost Recon universe. Veteran is a decent challenge out of the gate. Elite was much too difficult for the party I was in, but I don't know if that was inexperience in the players, or if the difficulty was scaled by the number of people in the party. Still a great game mode.
Multiplayer is the "meat" of the game (with Guerrilla getting the prestigious "potatoes.") The game modes vary depending on if you have a uPlay account (stupid, but I don't take off stars - it came with MY game, so I have a complete experience. The used purchasers may say otherwise...)
The four different modes are all unique enough that you have a different playing style for each - Conflict is an objective mode, random objective locations, and respawns. Decoy is a game mode (one that I really enjoy) where there are 3 listed objectives, but 2 are decoys, and one is the actual target - both the defenders and attackers don't know which is designated as the actual objective. Once that is found, there is another final objective to be hacked before the round is won. Respawns and emphasis on teamwork. Saboteur is a mode where you take one bomb on the map, and try to plant it in the other teams base. I haven't played but 3/4 games of this mode, but from what I did play, it was good fun. Siege is best described as a "Search and Destroy" clone - no respawns, objective based, best of three rounds. I love that Seige allows the defenders to set up before allowing the attackers to spawn in at the beginning. It requires and rewards teamwork.
Gunsmith is a fan-freaking-tastic layer to the game. You basically get to customize almost every part of your gun - barrel, stock, trigger, optics etc. The combinations are excellent. You earn unlock points in each class by leveling up, and most unlocks are available at the very beginning. You can test out each specific part of the modifications in the firing range right in Gunsmith, and it loads almost immediately, so you don't spend forever waiting at a loading screen just to see if you like the red-dot versus the Holo sight, or other various things.
No major gripes about the game just yet - and I'll edit if they become apparent.
One very minor gripe - there's a map (I don't know the name yet) but it went a little too far on the obstructed vision aspect. I get that it's probably very similar to what it would look like in an actual sand storm, but it doesn't mesh well with the gameplay. Every little while, everything pauses while everyone is blinded. Realistic? Probably. Fun? "meh."
4.5/5 - Rounded to 5.
TL;DR - great addition to the Ghost Recon family, definitely worth picking up (new better than used) and nothing major to complain about. Note: I've heard a few complaints "in-game" during multiplayer where people thought it was an FPS - it's not, it's a Third Person (over the shoulder) Shooter.
Edit: 5-25-12. Major network issues. I get that it's only 3 days post launch, but the "ghost" kills, host migrations, unable to find players, and general in-match lag are very detrimental to the experience. It's not every match, but it's every couple. This should have been addressed after the beta.
Minus 1 star. 3.5/5 rounded to 4
on June 9, 2012
Ghost Recon Future soldier is a new direction for the Tom Clancy games, that's for sure. I was a big fan of Advanced Warfighter 2. I enjoyed managing the battlefield assets, while being engaged in the battlefield at the same time. I also enjoyed the ability to progress through missions in many different ways. I enjoyed the Rainbox Six: Vegas games because of their cover-to-cover intensive shooter action. To a lesser degree I enjoyed some of the basic stealth-creeper action of some of the Splinter Cell games. GRFS is an interesting mix of these attributes.
GRFS will go from stealth-infiltration to run-and-gun battlefield action in a split second. Over all I found the game to be fairly "arcadey". You have a squad with you, and the friendly AI is pretty good. The friendly AI really never hurts you -- only helps you. They don't really get caught during stealth missions, they are pretty decent in combat, and only rarely need to be revived on the battlefield. I think the developers went out of their way to make sure they aren't a burden. Besides the "Sync Shot" stuff, you can't really control them. In that regard, I kind of miss GRAW2.
The cover system is worth mentioning. It is fantastic. It works very well, especially when moving from cover to cover, dynamically, on the battlefield. The peeking/leaning around cover, targeting your next piece of cover, and hustling to it -- all work fantastic. Hats off to the developers.
The stealth mechanic is a bit over-used in the game, but still works well. You'll realize very quickly that you are practically invisible, unless an enemy is very near to you and looking directly at you. You realize the horror of facing an active-camo enemy when you start running into them later in the game. Pretty fun.
The game plot is pretty run of the mill, but still interesting. The missions are varied enough that they don't get repetitive. In many of the missions the progression is linear, but in some you have the option of approaching them more from a stealth or front attack perspective. Many times you mix a bit to get through.
I played a tiny bit of the multiplayer. I don't buy these games for the multiplayer, but it didn't leave a bad impression on me. The cover system and gameplay seems identical to the single player, which is a step above the multiplayer experience in the GRAW games. I expect fans of multiplayer action will get a ton of mileage from it.
In conclusion, while the game isn't perfect, it was definitely a very good experience. If you are already a fan of the Tom Clancy games, you'll likely enjoy this. If you haven't gotten into these kinds of games yet, you may very well find this one to be a good introduction. It is light-weight, but tactical. It is unencumbered, but challenging.
on July 24, 2012
SP: There are enjoyable moments but ultimately I found it more frustrating than fun. It has two of my pet peeves: instant fail stealth missions (Splinter Cell dropped these for a reason) and timed missions where they put a clock on the screen and give you a countdown (it's an artificial way of creating tension). The story is completely forgettable. When you have your standoff at the end I could only think: who is this guy again? The characters are terrible and the character models in cut scenes are atrocious. Also there is level where you walk up 15 flights of stairs and do nothing other than listen to the AI complain about walking up the stairs -- brilliant game design!
COOP: Guerilla could be fun but they decided to not include matchmaking which is standard by this point. It's nearly impossible solo and not fun.
MP: So unbalanced. You're either dominating or getting dominated. I made it up to level 45 and I think maybe I played 5 close matches.
Summary: Bad game. Don't buy it.
on December 6, 2012
I really had hopes for this game. I miss the games from Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six series. I had hoped that this would fill that nich for me. The game had the potential but ultimately falls far short.
I have a fiber connection to the home but this game was plagued with so much lag it was unplayable.
In addition to the poor network performance, while the class configuration is extensive, probably the most advanced in the industry, it is ultimately very complicated and not accessible when playing. That is you do not have the option to modify a class easily between rounds, and need to set aside a block of time to configure your gear to your needs. Not my idea of a good time.
Ultimately this game fell flat and I moved on before I got my moneys worth.
on November 27, 2012
The game is great. It really utilizes the teamwork aspect that is very lacking in any of the other "warfare" games out there. If you are only looking out for yourself and not your team or the objective, you will not succeed in winning. This game has actually kept me from buying Black Ops 2 because of the emphasis of team work.
Biggest issue I have with this is that they had to keep it all 3rd person view. If they only had it similar to how they did Rainbow 6:Vegas; whereas you would be in First POV then 3rd POV when you went for cover, it would have made things that much easier and better for experience purposes. It's so annoying to have your target directly on someone's head only to find out you've been shooting the railing in front of you due to lack of perspective.
on July 1, 2013
Basically, I think that Ghost Recon is a pretty good game even though there were few intels to be found in it like in Call of Duty and the missions were real simple, I also must say that the game is worth the price. I loved the idea of rescuing and chasing some of the people in the game gives you a sense respect and responsibility and with the help of your teammates how they can save you when you are injured. I love playing online and I think that the online play is also neat since, all in all it's a good game. Thanks, c-ya!
on June 3, 2012
This game has been a major disappointment. I bought it three days ago, but decided to write this review before finishing it to make people aware of some serious shortcomings.
I love most games that borrow Tom Clancy's name, and that was part of the reason to buy this one. I do play a lot of multiplayer, but a great part of my multiplayer is at home on a split screen (also online).
The menu is a mess. It takes a while to find what you want, and what you cannot find, it takes a long time to figure out why. I go into campaign to find the co-op campaign, and it is simply not there. What happened here is the following:
- although the box is very misleading specifically stating there is a two player co-op that does not need live (orange color coded on the back), this does not include the campaign but just a little add-on.
- furthermore, the greedy producers added a code to play anything multiplayer online. The gae comes with one code, but that brings the added problems. If you play in a different console, it is gone. Two players in your house - nope. Have to buy more codes. If for one reason you buy it used - nope, have to buy code.
Now, a 60 dollar game that you cannot truly play the campaign with someone in your house, despite the misleading box clearly stating you can is just a waste.
The campaign itself, alone or online with someone else that has a code, is good and fun, but nothing spectacular.
Multiplayer can be fun, but the menus are confusing and difficult to use even for someone that is on xbox live on a daily basis.
I am actually sick and tired of expensive games that require you to keep purchasing and paying more for every little thing that should be included. After this game I will never buy a ubisoft game again.
on August 27, 2012
I'm never paying full price for an Ubisoft game again. I've been playing Xbox games for over eight years, and GRFS is the buggiest game I've ever had.
Ubisoft apparently has no problem punishing their best customers so that they can squash the spectre of used game buyers and software pirates. On the PC side, their games are saddles with an overly-intrusive DRM that makes it difficult for honest customers to play even the single-player campaign. On the Xbox, where we already pay for Xbox Live, you need to have a Uplay "online pass" in order to play multiple. The problem is that this technology, like all DRM, is broken. In addition, since the online pass normally costs $10, then your game immediately loses $10 trade-in value if you play the multiplayer even once.
For the past week, my friend and I have tried to continue our co-op campaign, but it doesn't work any more. Most of the time, the game refuses to connect -- either some nonsense about missing DLC (neither of us have purchased any DLC) or an inability to find the "host". When it does connect, my Xbox hangs as soon as we try to start the mission.
If you go to the Ubisoft forums, you'll find hundreds of people complaining about hangs and crashes. This game is just plain broken, and there is no indication that Ubisoft is actually trying to fix anything. This game has been out for three months, so it's completely unacceptable that it's still this broken.