Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Wildlands - 60$ experience
57 replies, posted
[video]https://youtu.be/jPWfVsCsYok[/video]
You mean free experience. The beta doesn't cost $60.
[QUOTE=simkas;51780910]You mean free experience. The beta doesn't cost $60.[/QUOTE]
You're gonna have to pay 60 bucks eventually.
[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;51780922]You're gonna have to pay 60 bucks eventually.[/QUOTE]
Well, yeah, for the full game you will. Not this beta.
Cautiously optimistic.
I don't know what you/re talking about. I stand on moving helicopter propellers all the time without getting chopped to bits.
This looks like a bargain bin shooter that will be played on Funhaus in 5 years.
Like, holy shit it looks like no one gave a shit.
[QUOTE=Zeos;51780987]This looks like a bargain bin shooter that will be played on Funhaus in 5 years.
Like, holy shit it looks like no one gave a shit.[/QUOTE]
It's a beta.
The only thing you can safely assume is going to change from the beta to the full release (in about 30 days mind you) is desynching issues and [I]maybe[/I] some animation issues.
Honestly the game concept looked neat, but then I remembered it's an open-world Ubisoft game.
[QUOTE=Llamaguy;51780990]It's a beta.[/QUOTE]
It's a game that comes out in 4 weeks.
[QUOTE=Llamaguy;51780990]It's a beta.[/QUOTE]
Most beta's are more like demos at this point, not much changes from here till release.
[QUOTE=RikohZX;51780995]Honestly the game concept looked neat, but then I remembered it's an open-world Ubisoft game.[/QUOTE]
It could've been some awesome combination between Arma, Ghost recon and Far cry
Instead it's a mixture between Far cry and the division, I swear the AI is copied from the divison
[QUOTE=Llamaguy;51780990]It's a beta.[/QUOTE]
Gonna save a lot of posts and just post the replies to this exact comment on the megathread for this game.
[QUOTE=Novangel;51778363]A beta one month from release is now the industry jargon for a limited demo[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=spekter;51778174]If it were a small scale indie game with not much going on sure it wouldn't take much but I don't think you understand or have much knowledge of AAA development cycles if you think bugs can be fixed within a month of release.
Take a look at any game on PC from the last year or two that had a very janky beta. They all took months of work to iron out critical bugs and some games still have major issues, especially Ubisoft ones.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=gk99;51777815]A shitty beta a month from release with no proof that it's months old.
[editline]a[/editline]
I mean I'm on the side of "it'll probably be fine" anyway. If you wanna take a look back a few pages I pointed out that an LP I saw of the PS4 version didn't seem to have any of the issues people were talking about, and the video was linked later on the page.
But "it's a beta!!!" and "it's probably months old!!!" with nothing but your word to go on is a pretty shitty argument and saying that we shouldn't judge the only playable media we have of the game because it [I]might[/I] be old is stupid.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=krail9;51777212]why do you feel the need to fervently defend this? maybe all these issues will be fixed by launch, maybe its an old build, etc etc.
but what people have to decide right now is not the final game's verdict, simply whether to preorder or buy on launch day. and with the current beta as an example you'd be an absolute moron to blindly trust that it will be better on launch, instead of simply waiting a couple of days to see how it turns out[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=plunger435;51776914]Four weeks to fix the floaty gunplay and driving, bad AI for teammates and enemies, buggy animations? I don't see it happening.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Llamaguy;51780990]It's a beta.[/QUOTE]
not an excuse
[QUOTE=lonefirewarrior;51780959]I don't know what you/re talking about. I stand on moving helicopter propellers all the time without getting chopped to bits.[/QUOTE]
You mean you don't?
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwNNdbW5Dlk[/media]
the "it's a beta" thing really doesn't fly when the game is out in less than a month
A beta in the 10's has meant it's a glorified demo or an early access game.
The stuff shown in that video is unacceptable.
i just want a game like MGSV but coop that isnt zombie shit
is that so much to ask
I get that the game is extremely ambitious, but why are common-place video game effects so screwed up? Like the bullet holes on the car windows, the animation for wild-life, basic interactions with npc/npc vehicles, and damage from chopper blades? It doesn't have to be pretty, just needs to BE there...
[QUOTE=ThePanther;51783377]I get that the game is extremely ambitious, but why are common-place video game effects so screwed up? Like the bullet holes on the car windows, the animation for wild-life, basic interactions with npc/npc vehicles, and damage from chopper blades? It doesn't have to be pretty, just needs to BE there...[/QUOTE]
Lack of polish. The exact same shit happened with Watch_Dogs 1, bunch of random little effects missing, couldn't even bother to have a shitty little puff for when you shot dirt.
Also, I wouldn't call it "ambitious" given that this is the exact same type of game Ubisoft has been shitting out for years by this point, and it does very little to deviate from their usual formula.
[QUOTE=Llamaguy;51780990]It's a beta.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=simkas;51780935]Well, yeah, for the full game you will. Not this beta.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=simkas;51780910]You mean free experience. The beta doesn't cost $60.[/QUOTE]
yeaaaah I don't expect quality control from Ubisoft of all fucking studios so don't expect the [i]"Release"[/i] to be much better than the[I] """"beta""""[/I]
Lack of quality aside, it really doesn't seem all that Tom Clancy-ish.
Maybe it was an original thing at some point, but had the brand slapped on to it?
ubisoft
Honestly, at this point even with Ubisoft aside, what really separates this game from other open-world games besides a stealth focus (and you can go guns blazing if you want) and an eye for teamwork? The idea of tackling different story 'branches' via different cartel leaders and their underlings has even been in Saints Row and Crackdown since the early days of the 360. The story is more tactical modern military jargon, and while the war on drugs is a massive, bloody and destructive affair in real-life, the game seems almost dead set on having some badass operatives running around in Bolivia tearing up the "world's biggest cocaine dealer" like it's just what they do, while said dealers ruthlessly wipe villages and citizens out to be asshole villains you get to kill with impunity. Like most other modern military shooters and modern Tom Clancy games.
I get that it's a beta, I get that we've not really seen some huge portion of the game, but I never really see anyone hyped for or caring much for Wildlands unless it's some Ubisoft game listing like "oh yeah that exists" or people wanting a co-op stealth action game. And to see it so unpolished a month before release, much like a certain previous Ghost Recon game being rather unpolished, reeks of the game just sort of being a filler open-world game to tide over consumers despite the developer effort put into it.
[QUOTE=ChickenMan99;51783597]Lack of quality aside, it really doesn't seem all that Tom Clancy-ish.
Maybe it was an original thing at some point, but had the brand slapped on to it?[/QUOTE]
It's tarnishing the brand and his name.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;51783900]It's tarnishing the brand and his name.[/QUOTE]
That happened many years ago already. Tom Clancy's name on a game now just means "it's got military or military-like stuff in it".
[QUOTE=Llamaguy;51780990]It's a beta.[/QUOTE]
Rising Storm 2's beta didn't have a quarter of these oversights and bugs
plus using the beta excuse at less than one month from release doesn't really work
Pathetic.
For those of you saying "it's a beta", you need to grow the fuck up, this shit isn't changing and everyone knows it, they have less than a month before the game comes out, this is pretty much the final release.•
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.