22 of 32 people found the following review helpful
Disappointing for fans of Ghost Recon series,
This review is from: Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier - Xbox 360 (Video Game)
Here's the problem with GRFS compared to GRAW. In GRAW your mission was to go and do things; in GRFS, your mission is to respond to things being done to you. This, thematically, is a huge change in gameplay. Instead of making tactical decisions given an enormous set of AI, geographic and class variables, you're simply sitting in a shooting gallery with targets popping up. "Shoot this one...now shoot this one...don't forget this one...here's two at the same time...Shoot them!"
You start out as a member of a team attacking a hillside caravan. After about five minutes, you get killed. That's right. You die. Not because of any choice you made but because that's what Ubisoft wanted to happen to you. You don't come back as a zombie or ghost soldier to play the remainder of the game. You just inhabit a new character. The message? Don't get too attached to your character, it can be destroyed at the ambivalent whim of the game writer. But it doesn't matter because they're all interchangeable. Ubisoft has deftly set the stage for a game in which you don't control anything, you simply get controlled by things around you.
At one point, all players must trade out their weapons for the same gun. But hey, wait a minute, I'm a sniper! Too bad, fella, here's your submachine gun to finish this mission. In GRAW, you were penalized for picking up a non-class weapon. Here? You're forced to take a non-class weapon. You want to know what the truly sad thing is? The "sniper rifle" that was my weapon for my "scout" class was an automatic machine gun. It didn't feel any different from the submachine gun.
But that's actually a good thing because you can't shoot targets from a distance. You can only shoot targets that are identified by a little...target identifying globe...that you throw like a grenade. So I can't snipe anyone outside of a ball-toss distance or I risk killing a civilian. So it was actually a benefit that my sniper rifle was set to full auto...but with a 20 round clip.
You know the wide open areas in GRAW where you'd need to slowly make your way to a window or wait for the perfect time to pick off the enemy from a distance? Not in GRFS. My team and I crawled up to a window, called out our targets and picked them off in perfect synchronization. FAIL! What? Okay try again. FAIL! Try again...oh wait what are these circles on the ground? Five seconds after we all stand in the circles, we enter bullet time, have our crosshairs set perfectly on our targets and easily take them out. What fun! Like I said: you don't play this game; this game plays you.
Then we were forced into the back of a truck and rode the rails through town shooting at targets that pop up around us. Classic (by which I mean lazy and tiresome) FPS design. Even worse, this ride through town is frequently interrupted by cutscenes that are indistinguishable from gameplay. Why can't I shoot??? It's a cutscene! When can I shoot again??? Dunno. Just keep the trigger pulled until bullets start coming out again. Like I said: you don't play this game; this game plays you.
Why is it called Ghost Recon? I couldn't tell you. It bears no resemblance to that unique, engaging world. Even to the point where coop gameplay is now limited to four people. I waited years to get MW with gimmicks. I've only played the first mission and its clear that Ubisoft has decided to remove everything I love and include everything I hate in this game. Anyone want a used disk (that they can't play unless they subscribe to Ubisoft's service)? Like I said: this game played me.
Tracked by 1 customer
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-8 of 8 posts in this discussion
Initial post: May 27, 2012 12:17:42 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 27, 2012 3:04:39 AM PDT
Coprolite Golem says:
I liked the first episode of the campaign. I really enjoyed it - the story was exciting. You've obviously experienced some superior campaigns which I haven't played.
You have a very strong point that there are not alternate paths to try in this campaign, so if you are buying this for the campaign, it has a good story, but creatively, you may like something more expansive as replaying missions for the story alone is likely best reserved for introducing new players to the game to get them up to speed for multi-player where the game really shines.
I played it to learn the ways of Ghost Recon Future Soldier to improve my online experience and not as the main product itself, so our expectations are for different things.
(I mostly skip campaigns to play multi-player, but I find myself curious for the further missions, which is a good sign for the storytelling if not the variety of options in how to tackle the mission).
I kind of liked having my first team be wiped out, it set up the story nicely.
In reply to an earlier post on May 29, 2012 6:07:52 AM PDT
S. Joshi says:
After reading your review, it does seem likely that Future Soldier was a step down from the standard Ghost Recon method of gameplay, however i beg for thinking. Does this really make the game 1 star?
Even if it is different (which Ubisoft was going for), it's still a great game and very well competes with CoD, Gears, Battlefield, or any other major blockbuster video game which btw had millions spent on marketing.
I also wanted to add that IMO, the game developers wanted to shift the focus more towards multiplayer since the market for online multiplayer games is way bigger. In order to balance the requirements for a successful mutiplayer game, it only made sense to create a campaign that had familiar mechanics to those "majority" who played the most popular online games as opposed to the few who were fans of the previous Ghost Recon games. Let's face it, it's not like Tom Clancy games were at the top of the list when it came to buying a game for christmas. With Future Soldier however, that sentiment was more appropriate.
So like I said, I do agree with some of the things you mentioned about the game, however your ratings are very inaccurate and your expectations may need some check.
In reply to an earlier post on May 29, 2012 8:06:39 PM PDT
Daniel Martin says:
He obviously didn't realize that he could use any weapon he has unlocked and any attachments in single player, try hitting the d-pad every now and then if the arrows weren't clue enough in the briefing screen when it shows the weapons. If your going to make a review and bash the weapons outfitting for campaign, at least show that your smart enough to realize you get to choose before each mission.
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 1, 2012 9:21:45 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 1, 2012 9:23:51 AM PDT
J. Barnes says:
@ Joshi: Does this make it a 1* game? For me, yes. Lots of people liked MW2. I despised it. My review is based on my gameplay preferences, not the marketing budget.
You're right, Ubisoft made the decision that they wanted a piece of the CoD/MW/BF pie and made a game that disowned its past. As someone who played GRAW 1 and 2 for years, I think that's a bad decision both as someone who wanted to see another GRAW-type game and as someone who doesn't care for the current style of war FPS's.
So my expectations do not need to be checked. Ubisoft called a game Ghost Recon that has nothing to do with their prior games called Ghost Recon. Was it unreasonable for me to expect a "Ghost Recon" game?
And my ratings are not inaccurate. You can say I should really, really like this game but my ratings accurate reflect my feeling about it. I vehemently dislike it.
@Martin: I know, I'm an idiot, right? How many weapons are unlocked in the first playthrough? Oh right: none. But yeah, I'm an idiot.
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 1, 2012 7:03:33 PM PDT
if you skip campaigns to just play multiplayer then you could problably play any piece of crap game and be happy
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 7, 2012 7:30:27 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Jun 7, 2012 7:40:50 AM PDT]
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 16, 2013 12:11:28 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 16, 2013 5:01:40 PM PDT
I've been playing Ghost Recon since its beginnings , and well before the days of GRAW. I find your review to be spot on. Its gone from a squad based tactical sim to a dumbed down react to this quicktime driven CoD/BF/GoW knock off, I too despise this style. Everything is a setup for their gimmicky "auto sync" shooting, just a rehash of the mark and execute bullet time crap Ubi put into Splinter Cell Conviction. GRFS is riddled with silly timed segments and infuriating escort shooting gallery sequences with no real options for tactics or squad control.
Posted on May 3, 2013 1:36:38 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 3, 2013 11:35:11 PM PDT]
‹ Previous 1 Next ›