Customer Reviews

3.9 out of 5 stars
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier - Xbox 360
Platform: Xbox 360Edition: StandardChange
Price:$11.99 + Free shipping with Amazon Prime
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

77 of 88 people found the following review helpful
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.
88 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
33 of 41 people found the following review helpful
on May 23, 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
99 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
18 of 22 people found the following review helpful
on May 23, 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.
22 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
32 of 44 people found the following review helpful
on May 27, 2012
The 4 & 5 star reviews have it right, but so do the one star reviews. Personally, I give it around -5 stars (much worse than terrible). I'm reviewing from the standpoint of a HUGE fan of its predecessor, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 (GRAW 2). In criticizing GRFS (this game) mercilessly from that viewpoint, hopefully the features that other players are sure to like will also shine through. With limited play time and a poor memory, I may get a few details wrong, but I've looked VERY carefully at GRFS, and think I have it sized up pretty well.

I almost exclusively played the various co-op campaigns in GRAW 2 (up to 16 humans against AI opposition), avoiding the single player campaign totally, and dabbling only a little in the various team and solo human-on-human conflicts. I was looking for a followup to GRAW 2, in the co-op campaign area. Let's got through GRFS to see if there is something to like.

My least favorite GRAW 2 co-op campaign was "Defend", where up to 16 people slaughter an endless onslaught of very stupid AI, for up to an hour (full hour needed to get the "achievement"). GRFS has a rough equivalent, in "Guerrilla" mode, that is much better. Here, up to 4 players team up to attack a rebel outpost (AI defenders), and then occupy it as wave after wave of AI attempt to take it back. After 10 waves, you fight your way into a new and different outpost and then defend it for 10 more waves. In between each wave, colored smokes just outside mark the spot of a helicopter drop of ammo and weapons, allowing you to rearm for the next wave. You'll have time to rearm if you don't dawdle. Better in many ways than the old "Defend", but for me has the same lack of appeal. Good mode - just not for me. (This mode also has a Huge Fail - shared with the other co-op mode, so see below.)

GRFS is lacking almost all of the remaining co-op modes of GRAW 2, having only a single additional one: playing the single player campaign (discussed below), but with up to 3 human friends, rather than 3 AI teammates. I've not played this, largely because you can only play with FRIENDS. You can invite people from your Xbox Live Friends list, and that's it. Since that list is limited to 100 people, and most won't be playing this game at any particular time, getting a full room is very hard. You'll find people on fora giving out their Gamer Tag, begging you to add them to your friends list so they can get a 4 player co-op mission going. Sad.

This is a Total Fail - GRAW 2 (and other modes in GRFS) allow random matching. Better still, in GRAW 2 you could "Host", where someone set up a room, chose a play mode and map, difficulty level, respawns, turned on or off various play aids, etc., and either invited people or let anyone just jump in (a search mode showed all the games of a given type running). If you wanted to play with a select group, a private room could be set up, invitation only. A lot of the fun was joining new groups and adapting to the playing style of new people, helping newbies get into the game, learning from experienced pros who knew all the maps and were deadly, etc. Now this spontaneity is gone. Maybe the "Clan" concept will save this - where groups of players join a clan and play together on a schedule. Sometimes these are loosely associated, sometimes with a hierarchical command structure of military precision (NOT my thing, never joined one). I don't see a provision for clans here, creating them, inviting people, etc., maybe I missed it. If it isn't here, you'd have to create your clan in other games, in online fora, or by causal meeting in other GRFS game modes that at least allow random matching.

Guerrilla mode has this same limitation (hinted at above), though it can be played pretty well with 2 or only 1 player. These limitations largely defeat the social aspects of GRAW 2, where people met and played in loose associations, as well as clans. That spontaneity is largely gone. The player isn't in charge, no hosting, etc., a theme that runs throughout GRFS - this is a game where you aren't in charge, and Ubisoft is. I'll highlight more of this, but it permeates the entire game.

Now we get to the human-on-human competitive modes, where two teams fight it out. These are both much better and infinitely worse than GRAW2, depending on what you like. They are better because they mix fighting and objectives. The idea isn't just to kill opponents, but to reach objectives, perform operations, etc., and to do so requires a lot of teamwork. The objectives come in a variety of flavors, all the way from one team defending, and the other attacking, to various supplies, intel locations, bombs, etc, which have to be captured, dominated, moved, etc. All good, a lot here for those of different tastes, and a big step up from a simple slaughter. (No every-man-for-himself who can kill the most mode, beloved by some.)

Here we get into character classes: Scout, Rifleman, Engineer, each with his own strengths, and special weapons. The selection of weapons is wide and there is immense customization in the so-called "gun shop" mode, where you assemble and test fire your weapons. The selection of secondary weapons and accessories is also large, too large in my view. Want a "drone" to mark enemies for you and your team? There are several - steerable, fixed, ground, air, toss-able, built into special gunsights, etc. Want to "hack" your enemy's com system and see all of their locations? Stun one and hack him with your computer (used to speed up some objectives too). The enemy will know that they are hacked though. You've got x-ray glasses that can see through anything, for a ways at least, and see metal objects (like guns), heat goggles to see enemies by heat through smoke (yup, smoke grenades), but also EMPs to knock out the enemy's high-tech. Want Harry Potter's cloak of invisibility? Your Scout class has one.

There are an almost infinite array of measures and counter-measures available, each cancelling the other out somewhat. It can get daunting, but players more tolerant of complexity than I am, and less interested in traditional battle tactics, will find the gadgets cool.

ONE BIG PROBLEM: they are almost all "locked". You'll start with very mediocre weapons, and gadgets, and as you "level up" and get XP, gadgets, gun accessories, weapons, etc., will either unlock, or can be "purchased" with XP. Since there are two sides in the competitive modes, you'll need to level them both up and equip them, but the two sides level together, so keeping them both similarly equipped won't be too big a chore. There is the issue that the 3 classes level and gain XP separately, so you'll have to fight in each mode and level them independently. You'll likely prefer one class, and level it most rapidly. You'll not want to get them TOO far out of sync, as each has special talents that you'll want to use occasionally. The Scout has the magic cloak, the Engineer has the drones and intel equipment, etc. So long as a team has some of each class you'll be OK, but don't depend on a random team being well balanced. You may have to be the Engineer if no one else is.

I've NEVER liked this kind of play, where the weapons you've acquired, and not your actual skill, is so determinative, but here the dislike is INTENSE. You'll have to play for a long time to unlock all the best weapons and gadgets, and this will take days and days of intense play (if you have a life, and can't just play 24/7). The guys with the high-tech weapons will DOMINATE you. This game has its share of fools, who'll not be helped that much by the best weapons and gadgets, but for the tactically sophisticated, the high-tech stuff will give them a prohibitive advantage over a new player who hasn't leveled up. There are self-guided bullets, proximity mines (of more than one kind), etc., etc., etc. A leveled up player will be the ultimate Predator, invisible at times (including on the move, unlike you poor noobs), able to defeat all of your technology, overpower your weapons, kill you from afar, and up close, able to stun you and have his way with you, etc. Want the definition of "pwned" - start fresh in GRFS after a lot of players have leveled up and you'll BE the definition.

Worse, I've seen no evidence of level matching when teams are assigned. Right now a few of the higher level players are slaughtering a good many low level ones, but if there isn't level matching, this will soon become a blood bath. Surely Ubisoft has taken this into account, and I've just not seen evidence of it.

Let's shift to the single player campaign. Word is that it takes 10 - 12 hours to complete, but is a bit easy (play in "elite" mode right away, and you'll likely not have that complaint, though some still do). Here we begin to see some of the Ubisoft tyranny in operation. This mode is very much "on rails" a good deal of the time. In GRAW 2 you ran the team, in GRFS you just tag along. It is up to you to mark targets for simultaneous kills by the team, a neat feature that Ubisoft is justly proud of, but which will start to get old fast. If you screw up, and alert the AI opponents, a nasty fire-fight will erupt. Like nasty fire-fights? They will erupt no matter what you do, when Ubisoft decides that they should. You're following a story here, and no matter what you do, things will go wrong when and how they need to for the story to unfold.

What do I mean by "on rails"? Well, you HAVE to stay with the team. Fighting up a street and want to flank around a house? "Signal is fading, signal is fading"; take another step and you just die. Rescued a guy? You HAVE to take him out into a hailstorm of bullets, the bag still over his head so you're guiding him with one hand with only your pistol in the other (oddly, later, in a similar situation, you get your primary weapon). The rest of the team is hollering a lot and shooting very little. It is up to you, with your pistol, to do it all (not impossible). You can only go one way, on a tight path, to one point of cover with your hooded rescuee. Lame, lame, lame. Of course all of this is prefaced, punctuated, and ended with cut scenes, usually unavoidable, where stupid and boring things happen to further the story, and over which you have no control. The visual quality of these scenes varies a lot - with sometimes ridiculously grimacing human faces "wrapped" onto GCI characters.

Like all the classic "cut-in" action from other games? Ubisoft has helpfully stolen it for you to play here. Door gunning from a helo, riding in trucks, commanding the War Dog as it spews shells and missiles. All good stuff if you like it, too bad I'm interested in tactics, not cut scenes, kick-azz armor tech, and set-piece shooting galleries. If you like it, it is here for you.

Your AI teammates are a mixed bag. They have personalities that come out in cut scenes, and while they aren't bad guys really, "shallow" does come to mind, as they are tough-guy cliches in many ways. Spare me this, I care about how they fight.

They actually fight pretty well, sometimes. They don't steal all of your kills, or trigger unwanted fire-fights (unless the script calls for it). They tend to talk a lot, some of it helpful (calling attention to enemies and movement), some of it distracting (calling attention to enemies and movement that seem to be imaginary). They are much more immune to being killed or observed that you are, and can get away with things that would get you spotted or killed in an instant. The idea is obviously that you determine how stealthy the team is, and you either live or die, but sometimes their relative immunity stands out. You can even use it to advantage in firefights sometimes, as they wade in where you'd be killed, making a few kills, but most importantly drawing fire to them, leaving you open to carry the load shooting from behind the team. It is a little odd, not being in command, but still responsible for finding enemies, calling shots, and sometimes taking the tactical initiative. For the most part it works, and you are at least relieved of the chore of ordering them around all the time.

Those who have played all the way through campaign complain of a few poor missions, especially the last one. Campaign has an unfinished feel, with some poor continuity and missions that violate the "rules" that apply elsewhere. Silly complaint really. A couple of poor missions don't ruin the good ones, and some are really good (despite the tendency to be "on rails" too much of the time.)

Don't listen to people who tell you the graphics suck. They're fine in every mode. It even has that nice traditional Ghost Recon look, just better. Same with glitches, all games have them, so does this one, but they rarely ruin it for you. Most can be worked around, others will likely be fixed soon. Not a reason to avoid the game at all.

To get back to the tyranny of Ubisoft, consider one of the team modes (some kind of assault, forget the name). If you are on the defend side, you'll notice a red fence near your base sometimes. Cross it and you die. Why? To enforce the teamwork aspect. This is one of the (many) big flaws in GRFS - the tendency to FORCE teamwork. If you wonder away from the base that you are supposed to defend, then you'll lose. The punishment for poor tactics is losing, but Ubisoft has to reach in and FORCE you to have good tactics by killing you if you don't. Weird & gratuitous. This mode, BTW, is one where you DON'T get infinite respawns like most of the team combat modes. That's nice, as it forces players to play seriously and not just run, gun and respawn. Fortunately, these only last about 5 minutes, so the wait isn't too long if you die early.

Another weird intervention: if you defend your team's Engineer as he hacks the objective in one mode, he "works faster" because he's "more confident". How close do you have to be to help his "confidence?" Your HUD will tell you (indirectly). Again, the price of not defending a player engaged in a "task" is losing. No need to enforce it with nonsense. Similarly, XP is earned by various teamwork actions, which is fine, but again gratuitous, as teamwork has its own reward: success.

I know this is rambling, but there is so much here. Don't like the complexity of the gadgets, and want a simpler or more "old-school" game play where all the paths aren't laid out and hidden enemies highlighted? Too bad, you can't turn off or restrict the gadgets and "aids" in use (Ubisoft proudly says that there are a "plethora" of them). Like the idea of an "I win" button? You're in luck - "X", the melee button, kills in one stroke, so if you round a corner and meet a fussilade of full auto, in your face, a quick "X" will win. Knife or bare hands beats machine gun - gotta love it! Not a great shot, but want a one-shot-kill at close range (remember the full-auto .308 won't usually do that)? The Engineer's shotty is for you. The Remington 870 has a wide spread and hits hard (too wide, too hard) and lays them down in one shot.

Want to trump the melee or the shotty? The stun gun might be your weapon. Too bad you were offered the choice of either it or smoke and went with smoke - you get one chance to choose, and once you make it you're stuck with your choice (except you aren't, eventually you can "earn" a do-over on your choices, but only one or two). Same with the self-guiding bullet, the long-range bolt from the blue that will take down someone on the run from across the map, too bad you chose the magic enemy-marking scope instead when given the choice. You're going to see "are you sure, this choice is permanent?" WAY too often (once is too often for me).

Want another in-your-face, Ubisoft Uber Alles, trick? Uplay is just your ticket then. The online modes are all (or almost all) locked when you start the game. How to unlock? Use the unlock code packed in the game to automatically set up a Ubisoft Uplay account, and you're in. Oh, you rented the game? Bought it used? Your cousin played it a while and then gave it to you. Too bad for you, the code only works for one Gamer Tag (even if it is still in the box), so you're out of luck, no online for you. There must be a way out (everything in GRFS has something else that trumps it). And the trump is? Why, THE Trump, the Old Spondulix, Jack, Benjamins - MONEY YOU FOOL! Ubisoft wants you to BUY online access for a game they've already sold. Not completely implemented, as far as I can see, Ubisoft has stolen (again) an idea from other gaming companies, that got started last year. Lock up online access so that rentals and resales have to pony up to get online. All the rage, coming soon to a game you play, GRFS being the 3rd recent release that Ubisoft has put this into.

There is so much, but I'll end with a little thing, that if you don't like you can just ignore, but which gives away the mindset behind GRFS - how it is targeted at the mass market for this kind of game, the lowest common denominator, with NO thought to continuing the Ghost Recon franchise, beyond superficial graphic similarity. Every time you start up, in the menus, you'll see a list of "taunts" from any of your friends who've played the game. Jack has more headshots than you. Jill more melee kills. Tom has leveled up higher than you. Dick is a better team player. Harry is hairier than you. Whatever. Don't take offense - Ubisoft is just monitoring all of your friends and putting up this trash, without them having any say in it. For those who WANT to, proactively, taunt their friends, Ubisoft has an Ap for that (a topic I'll brush past - look online), and an in-game method of issuing "challenges", to do certain things, so many times, before the taunter does. Worth accepting because you'll get XP if you succeed, and even if you aren't trying you might succeed just during normal play (and boy do you need leveling and XP to unlock goodies).

This silly automatic taunting is ridiculous. I happened to kill a couple of people (entirely accidentally, I have no XP, no levels, poor weapons, few tricks in my bag), while one of my friends happened not to be playing. He's been killing, leveling up, etc. What does he see, next time he starts up? A taunt that I have two more kills than him - BECAUSE I HAPPENED TO GET 2 KILLS WHILE HE WASN'T PLAYING. Sad.

Sounds like I hate the game, doesn't it? I do, passionately, since it has effectively ruined my favorite shooter franchise of all time. It has eliminated everything I liked about GRAW 2, and added everything I hate about a lot of other shooters. But, here's the thing - you might like what I hate, and hate what I like. Those stolen bits from other games were stolen from popular games, and the guys at Ubisoft think they are bits key to their popularity. It isn't just theft either, as there are some fairly original details here that look like winners (just not for me and my style of play).

Take a look at GRFS, maybe watch a friend play, etc., especially the online matches. This may be a great game for you (those with a sharp eye will see things that they like in my criticisms). For me it is the opposite of fun - hence the long review. For you it may be a fresh take on everything that you like in shooters. I hope that it is.
66 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
10 of 13 people found the following review helpful
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.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
30 of 41 people found the following review helpful
on May 22, 2012
I picked up the game last night and absolutely love it. Cover system is the best out of every game I have played so far, third person (with first person zoom) adds a new dimension to the genre, and overall, Ghost Recon is an amazing game. Possibly one of the best features is that every mode, including the 12 hour campaign and 15 hour guerrilla mode, includes Co-op, which for me, makes the game even better. I love call of duty and battlefield, but this game is so refreshing. You actually have to play extremely tactically and if you are tired of the sometimes irritating and boring run and gun gameplay of duty and battlefield, you should definitely pick up this game. Kudos to Ubisoft
1313 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
10 of 13 people found the following review helpful
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.
33 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
7 of 9 people found the following review helpful
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.
11 commentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
5 of 6 people found the following review helpful
on May 28, 2012
Ghost Recon: Future Soldier screams rushed product from the arduous title screens, (yes there are multiple) game crippling lag during online play, & random equipment items that just do not work for whatever reason. This game plays like an alpha or beta build & needs several more months in the development cycle for polish. I have never been a huge GR multiplayer fan but decided to give this a day in court & it resembles last years Resistance 3. Innovative ideas with good maps but broken gameplay & horrible lag, and that's when the servers are up & running. But here are the pros & cons IMHO:

1. Long campaign (13 levels with built in challenges = a lot of fun)
2. Innovative ideas for modern shooters
3. Smart team A.I. (sometimes, especially early on)
4. In game graphics are good, cut scenes not so much
5. Sounds are good when they work (patch?)
6. Wide weapon & equipment variety. It's seriously on par with any CoD game on that front period.
7. Maps vary in size & play.

1. Frustrating menu system
2. Horrible lag during multiplayer
3. Story: missed character development opportunities. And I'm sick of "military" game makers getting so many details wrong, regular sailors don't have goatees and soldiers never say "oh" for zero, they say "zero" as in zero five thirty. This may not seem like a big deal but the devil is in the details, and it shows that a foreign company developed a game about US soldiers.
4. Lack of split screen features even though the game case says there is 2-player split screen campaign...there is not (rushed?)
5. Very slow progression system that does not reward players fast enough. Have we learned nothing from Halo or Call of Duty in the last decade?
6. No matchmaking for campaign or Guerrilla, seriously what is going on here because you have achievements for these modes but unless you troll the forums at Ubisoft or talk your friends into buying this your outta luck with those achievements.

Overall this is good game to kill time with over the slow summer months but be warned you will get frustrated often. I can't help but think how good this could have been with a few more months of development or launching with the next generation of systems that might be able to keep up with lofty Ubisoft ambitions.

Verdict: Buy
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
TOP 1000 REVIEWERon April 12, 2013
Let me preface this by saying I'm not a fan of Call of Duty-style shooters that revoke all creative tactical license, but was a HUGE fan of the original Ghost Recon series. For me, GR:Future Soldier is a hearkening back to those roots with a smart, modern take. I'll also admit to not caring about online multiplayer, so for that you should seek a different review. I'm here for the game, the actual story.

Ghost Recon has always been about a small team, weapons choice, and moving unseen. Or, for those who really want to pick a firefight, its always had that option, too. In GR:FS, the new customization options for weapons makes significant gameplay difference. The storyline itself follows a very classic GR model of infiltrate, gather intel/eliminate target, exfiltrate. There is also some great homage to the original games, from laptops lying around in enemy buildings (in the original you would gather them) to a very classic tank attack (in the originals, tanks were your arch-nemesis) to sneaking in and planting pack-demolitions (fortunately no longer requires a specific team member like the old days). Stylistically, this is also a return to the tactical roots of Ghost Recon, in which you can silently eliminate enemies one-by-one like a carefully calculated puzzle or you can slip by unseen entirely in true Ghost fashion.

And therein will lie the problem for many modern gamers: GR isn't a run-and-gun game. It will allow you to play that way, but it isn't well rigged for it so the experience will be lackluster. GR is a puzzle to solve, where you observe enemy movements and calculate strategy. In GR:FS the drone is your surveillance lifeline and is used to spot, tag, and eliminate targets.

All of that love given, there are some peculiarisms that preclude a five-star rating. There are times when I can see a room is empty (with drone, sensor, or scope), but when I enter the room there is a guard. I'm also not a fan of the "get shot, duck down, you're fine" healing in modern games, and preferred the original "once you're shot you're wounded for the mission" type realism of the old games - especially in GR where you should never get shot. And my biggest dislike: everything about the game for 12 missions is built around stealth, calculation, and execution. In the last mission, this style is inexplicably thrown aside and you are railroaded into a timed run-and-gun at the end of which you stack up and are forced to use an imprecise submachine gun (which I had never used prior in the game) - leading to an unnecessarily-complicated ending that should have been resolved with a sniper rifle 10 minutes earlier. On the up side, your AI team members are fairly good (but not god-like) and don't require constant supervision. They are there to execute your tactics, not be in your way - and they're (usually) pretty good at it. And the enemy AI, while not moronic, is not there to press you so much as it is to be pieces in your puzzle.

This is the first Ghost Recon game in a decade that has actually felt like Ghost Recon to me. The addition of some variable-style missions, open weaponry, and new technology brings the feel into the modern era and I thoroughly enjoyed the game.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse

Questions? Get fast answers from reviewers

Please make sure that you've entered a valid question. You can edit your question or post anyway.
Please enter a question.
See 1 answered question

Customers who viewed this also viewed


Send us feedback

How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you?
Let us know here.

Your Recently Viewed Items and Featured Recommendations 

After viewing product detail pages, look here to find an easy way to navigate back to pages you are interested in.