Ghost Recon : Wildlands V1 - Some are Soldiers, We are Ghosts. - Games

The only huge problem I have with this game is the helicopter controls. But yeah I'm in agreement with a lot of you folks that this game is pretty janky, so I'm going to give it a miss at release and check it out somewhere down the line. And I dunno have this. [media]https://youtu.be/ibCnTSeQMF0[/media]

[VID]https://a.uguu.se/rbOdRxVLMDAX.webm[/VID]

We'll just have to wait and see when it releases. To be honest I'm used to a certain amount of jank anyway since I tend to play older games or games like STALKER where the game is technically a mess, but still fun. That makes most games a judgement call for me, rather than an avoid. I wish I'd gotten in the beta, though. Signed up and never heard anything.

[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;51775684]4 weeks is more than enough time to polish any minor bugs. Hell, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided's final polish was going to be run through in only 2 weeks before but the publisher demanded they implement that microtransaction system. Wildlands' jankiness is the result of some issues with the physics and animations which can easily be ironed out in 4 weeks time. They probably also wanted to see if there were any more bigger bugs that can't be captured in small QA tests and those can be fixed in a month too.[/QUOTE] You do not understand how game development works. That is not enough time to reliably fix bugs in any notable capacity. As in test, fix, then test again to see that nothing else is broken due to the changes. The last month of development is almost exclusively designated for certification. The bugs that get fixed are class A bugs. Crashes, freezes, or anything that doesn't meet TRC/XR requirements. Everything else is listed as a known shippable bug that gets fixed later.

It's beyond just jankiness or bugginess though, there was a very distinct lack of difficulty in the beta. The enemies die in one or two hits, the AI is dumb as bricks and just runs at their nearest piece of cover (which is penetrable 80% of the time) and one way or another, all the firefights seem to be over within 30 seconds. There wasn't much to the stealth system either, our group went in to a supposedly heavily guarded compound with suppressed pistols, and all we had to do was just crouch walk through it and shoot everyone close by on sight and we never got detected. There's no real depth to it besides "don't stand in a cone of view for longer than 3 seconds". The customization is nice though.

Keep in mind that this is the very first area you start in and it's only the first few hours of the game. I imagine the difficulty will keep increasing after that part and I imagine other areas will have way more enemies and probably some more elite type enemies around.

[QUOTE=simkas;51776245]Keep in mind that this is the very first area you start in and it's only the first few hours of the game. I imagine the difficulty will keep increasing after that part and I imagine other areas will have way more enemies and probably some more elite type enemies around.[/QUOTE] I'm not trying to be an asshole here, but adding additional environments or forms of difficulty later in the game won't fix the problems with the game's core mechanics and AI. Issues like that don't get solved easily. And they certainly don't get solved a few months before release. If you expect the final game to be much different from this beta you're going to be extremely dissappointed.

[QUOTE=simkas;51776245]Keep in mind that this is the very first area you start in and it's only the first few hours of the game. I imagine the difficulty will keep increasing after that part and I imagine other areas will have way more enemies and probably some more elite type enemies around.[/QUOTE] I hope you're right. I feel like that can only add so much to it though, as even the super elite Unidad dudes were pretty easy to beat. The issue was more integral to the game (broken AI mostly) than just the enemy count or health. I mean I was able to just run in on Ghost difficulty and basically solo an entire compound going loud in what felt like 45 seconds, which even in the early game is a bit silly. If all it's going to do is double or triple the amount of enemies in the compound, I'm not sure that's the right sort of difficulty. The cool thing about FarCry 3 & 4 enemies in stealth was the really unique archetypes which had their own weaknesses and their own strategies to fight, so you had to [I]kind of[/I] plan your approach. While Wildlands stealth seems to boil down to flying a UAV above the site before entering it, and the enemies seems to just boil down to "will this guy run to cover and die in two bullets or will it take four bullets?"

Lots of people saying here that there's only 1 month left and that this isn't an old build. It has to be. It's maybe not as old as some people in here are saying but consider the amount of time it takes for Microsoft and Sony to greenlight stuff on their store. Also in large game studios, the game won't be in a working state 100% of the time. These kinds of things require quite a bit of clean up to make a somewhat stable build during development - especially when it's being released to a massive audience that judges it so harshly (this thread is proof of this). I'm not saying the build is months old, but it's certainly not the newest build they have. Gameplay probably won't change much but there's a fair chance it will be optimized a bit better and shit.

[QUOTE=venom;51776241]It's beyond just jankiness or bugginess though, there was a very distinct lack of difficulty in the beta. The enemies die in one or two hits, the AI is dumb as bricks and just runs at their nearest piece of cover (which is penetrable 80% of the time) and one way or another, all the firefights seem to be over within 30 seconds. There wasn't much to the stealth system either, our group went in to a supposedly heavily guarded compound with suppressed pistols, and all we had to do was just crouch walk through it and shoot everyone close by on sight and we never got detected. There's no real depth to it besides "don't stand in a cone of view for longer than 3 seconds". The customization is nice though.[/QUOTE] Enemies should die in only a couple of hits, it's a Tom Clancy game they're supposed to evoke realism. I don't want The Division's bullet sponge design to leak into the rest of the Tom Clancy games. As for the AI and fights being over too quickly what difficulty did you play on? They're always stupid but on the hardest difficulty if you're detected the first thing the enemy does is call in reinforcements.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;51776324]Enemies should die in only a couple of hits, it's a Tom Clancy game they're supposed to evoke realism. I don't want The Division's bullet sponge design to leak into the rest of the Tom Clancy games. As for the AI and fights being over too quickly what difficulty did you play on? They're always stupid but on the hardest difficulty if you're detected the first thing the enemy does is call in reinforcements.[/QUOTE] I agree with that as well, it doesn't need enemies that are bullet sponges, but it doesn't lend itself to the gameplay in this very well. The AI is incredibly dumb and it just becomes a shooting gallery where all the targets are scattered around hiding behind quarter inch thick plywood. I was playing on Ghost, can't confirm but I'm sure the other three were playing on at least hard. The reinforcements are very easily dealt with as well, and half the time the reinforcements don't even show up or their vehicle crashes into multiple things before parking WAY too close to us and they get lit the fuck up while disembarking. I've been fucked up by the minigun truck pulling up right beside me though, but apparently the minigun only traverses horizontally 10º in each direction so that's not too hard to deal with either. One thing I will say though is the sniper rifles are super fun to use. The bullet travel is hella exaggerated but it makes it satisfying to use.

I was playing Future Soldier earlier and it made me think of a few ways Wildlands could make itself stand out compared to every other open world game, as well as being more mechanically consistent with previous games. - Remove the ability to spot enemies and replace it with enemies being highlighted when in the FoV of your team mates or your drone. This would remove the "Tag literally everything, become omniscient" style of gameplay which infests open world games as well as forcing you to use tactical positioning for your drone. - Make your AI buddies not retarded and give a proper command system. It would be great if you could tell a sniper to sit on a ridge and cover you or tell a guy with a LMG to cover a specific area, rather than kind of bumbling around behind you and not doing anything like they do now. - Give the drone a significantly longer battery, but have it take longer to recharge once it expires. This is to go with the spotting change. The drone should be a constant eye-in-the-sky which gives you a tactical edge over the enemy, and you should be able to lose that edge. At least for a time. - More interesting enemy types. As Venom said above Far Cry has a fun stealth system because you have to deal with different enemy types. Wildlands right now just has 'Guys with assault rifles' and 'Snipers'. Not exactly thrilling. - Add some kind of camouflage system. It doesn't need to be hugely in depth but the ability to dress your self for the surroundings and having it matter would be nice. It'd make it so you sit in bushes waiting for enemies to turn around less. - Some kind of traversal gear. Getting around in this game without a car is a real drag with how mountainous the area is. Some climbing gear like a pick or rope would make getting around more dynamic, and allow for more interesting infiltration opportunities.

[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;51775246]I like how people are judging the complete package of a game based solely on the starting area of a test build while ignoring the fact there are 20 other regions to go through in the final game. Y'all are silly. Think about any other starting area of a game you played. Was that section enough to judge the game as a whole?[/QUOTE] If it runs like shit and the cars handle poorly and the game is janky as fuck (all things I've read in the thread) then yeah I think those are things that you can and [I]should[/I] judge a game on. What region you're in doesn't fix all that.

[QUOTE=gk99;51776611]If it runs like shit and the cars handle poorly and the game is janky as fuck (all things I've read in the thread) then yeah I think those are things that you can and [I]should[/I] judge a game on. What region you're in doesn't fix all that.[/QUOTE] But not what you should judge the full game on with this being a beta.

So I skimmed through the past few pages, does anyone know why when I try to launch the game it says "Your Graphics Card doesn't support directx 11" I have a 1060, so i'm pretty sure it supports dx11 and 12.. Should I try reinstalling the game?

try reinstalling your drivers or Direct X

[QUOTE=gk99;51776611]If it runs like shit and the cars handle poorly and the game is janky as fuck (all things I've read in the thread) then yeah I think those are things that you can and [I]should[/I] judge a game on. What region you're in doesn't fix all that.[/QUOTE] It's a [b][u][i]BETA.[/b][/u][/i]

the problem with the "Beta is just a new word for Demo" arguement is sometimes it is, but most of the time they're legitimate betas to iron out bugs and shit, yet people still see things as a Demo and if it has any issues they write of the release game. Even most Betas for multiplayer games that come out weeks before releases of the game are for testing server load and shit like that, or tweaking balance. I havent played the Wildlands Beta, and from what's being said here it sounds like it has a lot of issues, but I wouldn't say that the technical issues are going to be representative of the final game. Basically just wait like a week until after the game comes out and see what people are saying about it. [editline]4th February 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;51776767]It's a [b][u][i]BETA.[/b][/u][/i][/QUOTE] at the same time, you cant handwave EVERYTHING wrong with it as it being a beta. Issues with driving physics and handling are probably something that might not change. Again though, just wait until the game is released and watch release gameplay and listen to what other people are saying about it before you make and final judgement.

[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;51776767]It's a [b][u][i]BETA.[/b][/u][/i][/QUOTE] Four weeks to fix the floaty gunplay and driving, bad AI for teammates and enemies, buggy animations? I don't see it happening. [editline]4th February 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Ghost101;51776188]We'll just have to wait and see when it releases. To be honest I'm used to a certain amount of jank anyway since I tend to play older games or games like STALKER where the game is technically a mess, but still fun. That makes most games a judgement call for me, rather than an avoid. I wish I'd gotten in the beta, though. Signed up and never heard anything.[/QUOTE] This isn't like STALKER where the AI and gunplay is so good that it makes up for any bugginess, pretty much every single area in this game is lacking.

Just finished a 3 hour random online session with some randoms and I still really enjoy this game. Maybe I'm just lucky or blind but I don't see a lot of jankiness or bugs. Honestly were it not for the performance being terrible I'd probably buy it at release.

[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;51776767]It's a [B][U][I]BETA.[/I][/U][/B][/QUOTE] 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

Game looks like a pretty generic consolized simplified shooter. Even has regenerating health.

Signed up for the beta, didn't get in, Maybe they will add more later. Hope so cause the game looks fun, especially the customization.

[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;51776767]It's a [b][u][i]BETA.[/b][/u][/i][/QUOTE] 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.

So i just finished playing this with my 3 friends The bugs were the best part of the game and that isn't a good thing The enemies are far too easy to kill, the AI is garbage in general and feels like they just copy pasted the AI from the divison, the 'stealth' part of the game is a snore fest. The most fun we had was ramming trucks into each other and running each other over which is a shame because I was really hoping it would be some sort of hybrid between Farcry and Arma Instead it turned out to be some sort of shit hybrid between the divison and farcry

the starting area is stupidly easy because the enemy aren't wearing armor. that's okay though because if you look at the map screen it's the only level 1 area in the game. there's like two level 2 areas and two level 3 areas, and then after that it's pretty much max skulls. but wait... does that mean once you complete those 5 areas you're going to be fighting nothing but heavily armored guys? yep. you know what that means. by the time you get to mid-game, there's absolutely zero reason to use anything other than anti-material sniper rifles and heavy assault rifles. SMGs won't do enough damage. pistols will be useless. most of your gear will be nerf guns by the time you start really playing the game. welcome to wildlands. the only triple A title where multiplayer doesn't work remotely as intended, the AI is absolutely balls-to-the-wall retarded and our development cycle leaves us with no time to actually [i]make the game[/i] so instead we have you doing the same 5 missions over and over again through 21 different locales that look different but [i]feel[/i] absolutely the same!!! remind you of anything??? (hint, big boss big boss!!!) ghost recon wildlands is a shit game. there's no question about it. you can't justify that the faults with the beta are due to it being a beta. almost every single problem with the game deals with fundamental gameplay. terrible AI, awful vehicle controls, character "piloting" because the movement is so clunky. 100 hours of driving from point A to point B with nothing to do in between. it's not a tom clancy game. it's not a ghost recon game. it's just a shitty game with the tom clancy logo and the ghost recon name slapped on top of it. [editline]4th February 2017[/editline] ubisoft don't give a shit if this game sucks though because what else are you going to buy in march. i'll probably end up buying it myself because beggars can't be choosers. it's not my definition of "fun," but it's "fun enough." and i think that's all ubisoft ever goes for with their games. they've hyped it up enough that little kids and bro gamers will guarantee the game becomes a commercial success but that doesn't stop it from literally looking like they spent less than a year actually making the game

[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;51776767]It's a [b][u][i]BETA.[/b][/u][/i][/QUOTE] 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=T-Sonar.0;51776767]It's a [b][u][i]BETA.[/b][/u][/i][/QUOTE] A beta one month from release is now the industry jargon for a limited demo

[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] Thats not entirely true. Look at the BF1 Beta. It was about a month before release and it had some pretty bad bugs, but Im fairly certain almost all of them were fixed by the time the game released.

The gameplay loop of Battlefield 1 was solidly set a year ago, the 'beta' was more for finding the worst bugs and network testing, or so I can guess. If the actual regular gameplay of the beta is dull this close to the release, the actual regular gameplay of the full game is doomed.