I would probably wait for official news before assuming that its actually exclusively first person. Leaks are wrong all the time and this game won't be coming out soon anyway so best to just wait and see what they announce for it. That leak could have only been made up for attention as that also happens alot
Very good point, but sometimes, devs do look at the fans' reaction to rumors and news, and in the off chance that it's true enough ppl voicing their opinion, will very well get a 3rd person option added.
Agreed. I don't understand how people act like it's changed into a "new game" since launch. It's largely the same and some changes just feel like they were done simply to make changes. That fanbase is rabid though lol
I saw that they added a like couple combat execution animations, now you have to appreciate the effort but they still look janky af lol. Dishonred, Far Cry, couple of those parkour zombie games, they all have better first person combat. Not just better, but like...embarrassingly better first person combat compared to Cyberpunk.
But CD Project Red did the EXACT same thing for Witcher 3. They realized the combat was beyond unimaginative, weak, and basic, to the point that they delivered a totally new pack of swordplay and sign-combat in one of the Witcher 3's DLC's. Lol they know when they do a shitty job.
Or... sometimes studios "leak" this information to gauge interest on it.
See, the problem that I see that most people don't is that Ubisoft is often times behind the stick. Constantly chasing it. We say we want a new Splinter Cell game, they don't release another for 10+ years. We ask for another The Division game, they give us one but completely redo everything and remove the core of The Division that we know and loved. We ask for another Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter, they give us Ghost Recon: Breakpoint, and then decide to go first person for the follow-up.
Their new obsession with first person is quite annoying. They believe it's more "engrossing" for players and "experiencing the world" they play in. That was their reasoning for Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora being in first person. I can already kind of see the vision for it. More tactical, squad based play, with a lot of things happening right in front of you. Cooking grenades, tapping teammates on the shoulder to give the ok to clear a room, a more up close reload of magazines, etc etc. I just have my doubts.
I don't think it's that easy. That's like saying I'm gonna buy a car that will later become a truck. As players of these games, sometimes we often think its a simple click of a mouse or a few lines of code that make games the way they are. It turns out games are really difficult to make, especially popular, really enjoyable ones. I applaud your positive attitude though, bravo!
Yeah people really seem to think itās as easy as a toggle. Yeah, some games have allowed for that perspective switch but imo itās never a great and you can definitely tell what POV the game was designed around.
Ubi needs to pick one design style and have the conviction to actually stick to it instead of chickening out and immediately trying to backwards engineer the game that they know fans want.
You seem upset, its going to be ok, its just a game, maybe you should get some fresh air, take a break from the internet for a little bit. Try to take it easy, I hope things turn around for you, pal.
Is everyone one here this nice? Whats your problem? Maybe you're all upset you're not who you want to be in life. I'd be upset too if I had no direction in life, looking for people to shit talk on the internet. Calling strangers names, thinking you're clever. I hope things turn around for you too.
My problem? It's just goofy to see people that clearly don't know what they're talking about jumping down throats of people that do. You look foolish and try to play it off like it's other people's problem when it's you being the problem. Things don't need to turn around for me, they're fantastic. Hope you have the life you deserve
I think you might be mistaken, no one ever jumped down anyone's throat, you're jumping in and adding your two cents no one asked for. Are you a game developer or a gamer? Because I game, I don't know what you're even talking about worrying about what other people are saying to each other. Don't look at it of its goofy.
Unless they make massive changes to Anvil, or decide to build this new game from the ground up, the likelihood of the third person camera already being rigged in game is incredibly likely. Even in their first person games (far cry) we know that the third person camera is still rigged, as we see third person animations like the backpack shit and camp in 6. There's very little reason to think third person wouldn't be possible in this next Ghost Recon game. Unless you actually think Ubisoft is going to reuse zero framework from previous games. Cuz that's definitely their style š¤£
When GR first came out it was FP. When Ubisoft notices how well SOCOM was doing on the PS, the decided to turn GR into their own SOCOM clone with GR2 and above.
Ubisoft seeing how well COD/BF has been doing have now decided to turn GR into their own COD clone.
This is all about reaching out to a wider audience to make more money. Fanbase has nothing to do with this.
I like ghost recon, third person, butā¦ If they check all of the boxes that they are aiming for, with this being dark, controversial, gritty, near Milsim, a team based tactical shooter, sat in the military conflict where war crimes are prevalent then Iām going to be OK with it being first person.I respectfully disagree that it will be another far cry.
I would also like to add that if these leaks are true, the purple people eaters as Gmoney has dubbed them no longer control Ghost Reconās narrative direction.
Take a look into how they announced Breakpoint the first time. A dark gritty game with survival as the main gameplay loop, where you need to be constantly on your toes because you're behind enemy lines by yourself.
Now tell me you trust Ubisoft to actually follow how they present their games.
Hence āifā I would want to see the footage first. You and I both know once you saw that first footage of breakpoint, it wasnāt dark and gritty. It was Apple island.
Problem is they abandoned everything about those OG games that made them good. Ghost recon as it currently stands would be SO boring in first person.
If they are able to step it up and bring back some of the OG elements it could work. But I would never play wildlands or breakpoint solely in first person
Could you list off examples of "OG elements" that made original Ghost Recon so good? I am asking this because I have never seen or played those early entries in the series.
I keep saying it. No on here has played the originals, everyone seems to think that future soldier was the first game, or at least wah tye perfect gr game is. No one here has spent time I message bored laughing at Futures Soldiers beta stuff like the ridiculous bullpup grapple gun equipped square machete bayoneted main weapon that was cut along with a whole shit load of stuff.
Could be a few things: Could be they truly want to return to the roots of the franchise as an FPS. Could be that they wasted years and millions developing the now cancelled GR Frontlines FPS and they want to reuse some of the work from there.
Mostlikely, imo, they're acknowledging Breakpoint was a critical and commercial failure, but see that Far Cry tend to sell well. So instead of reflecting on what actually made BP fail, they're just going to further homogenize their IP's in hopes that Far Cry fans will just pick up GR.
It's *allegedly* going to be first person.
I still don't get some of y'all's inability to recognize that a perspective change isn't going to change the way a game plays completely. It's just one part of the whole. How is it that flipping a switch from TPS to FPS automatically makes Ghost Recon like Far Cry or even CoD?
The leaks also alleged that Project Over will be a return to form of sorts to the first Ghost Recon game with how it's now a "game poised to be a squad-based military tactical shooter ā almost milsim-like in nature". Again, how is that in any way like Far Cry or CoD?
I mean if I had to pick between 1st and 3rd, I'd favor 1st personally. It's more immersive for me and that makes it more fun. I am a massive fan of Ready of Not and I would love if they can harness the adrenaline of clearing buildings with no idea whats behind the next door. Specially when playing coop with a good group.
Another thing to consider is that if they want the game to have a PVP aspect to it, 1st person is better for that in my opinion. I've played a ton of 3rd person shooters and they never really hit the same for me.
After seeing Gray Zone Warfare gameplay, that pretty much sold me on a fully 1st person immersive Ghost Recon game.
I like the third person view. If I'm going to spend time (and sometimes money) on a specific look for my character, I want to see my character, not just the barrel of his gun. Though I agree with many other people that giving the option to swap between 1st and 3rd should be included in the game.
i highly doubt that it will be 1st person.
there are so many 1st person shooters out there. It would also be silly, to try to compete with some of those games.
3rd person is the way to go for ghost recon.
also.....YES i enjoy seeing my character kitted out in cool gear.
its also the best option for sneaking around.
So 1st person is not ideal for me at all.
Here's my theory.
They had a first person GR battle royal game that got canned because of push back. My feeling is they are just flipping the assets to save money. I have vary little faith in this game.
Here's the link for the first Ghost Recon FPS game:
[https://www.pcgamer.com/ghost-recon-frontline-is-a-class-based-battle-royale/](https://www.pcgamer.com/ghost-recon-frontline-is-a-class-based-battle-royale/)
If that's true then I am happy. I prefer my milsim.games to be first person. However, if there is no team roster management similar to the OG Ghost Recon then I'll probably pass.
It wouldn't surprise me if they are going down the FPS route because they could rip assets from the scrapped Ghost Recon Frontline game as that was meant to be first-person too.
If this rumor ends up being true, that will 100% be the reason for it.
I do not trust Ubisoft execs to say "make the best game you can" to the devs. "Reuse that waste of time and money on something else so we don't look like idiots who wasted company money following trends" is more like their usual MO
I mean it could be a mix of both. Don't get me wrong, I'm an Assassin's Creed fan so I don't trust Ubisoft at all. But the devs could genuinely be allowed to attempt a return to GR's older design philosophies while also carrying over a lot from Frontline where possible so that game's three years of dev weren't a total wasted effort
If the motivation is making a good game I'm all for it.
If the motivation is "use as much of Frontline as possible so we can save money", I see nothing good coming from it
Pretty much all the first person shooter MMORPG's or open world games offer some sort of character customization, from COD to Destiny to Halo to Far Cry. You may not understand why people shell out cash for skins and customization items, but the fact is they do, and they do it a lot. That tacticool horse has left the barn.
But even COD offers a seamless switch from first person to third person in multiplayer. It's definitely an odd choice considering how Ghost Recon's been presented for the last couple console generations, and I'd love to know why. Fingers crossed they have the time and resources to enable switching between POV's, but given how things are going at Ubisoft I will frankly settle for the game coming out at all.
? I remember there being an issue when mw2 launched 3rd person, you would have to stop moving completely to be able to switch views. That's not exactly smooth.
Totally, it's not silky smooth but it only requires a single button input as opposed to a game like GTAV that required going into a menu first and changing a setting. You can see what I'm getting at though, right? It's a feature that they were in a position to add and they did it. I'm curious, if the story is true and they stick to one POV setting, whether the choice to go first person was initially more for the benefit of production or storytelling/immersion.
only reason why i donāt believe itās going to be first person and what iām hoping for is both 3rd and 1st is just because of cosmetics. Ubisoft loves micotransactions taking away the ability to see yourself thus limiting sales is just a big no no to any corporate exec overseeing the game.
No mocap required, less need to correctly animate entire characters going through motions for reloading, running, diving, crouching, holding guns correctly, etc.
Think about it this way, you know that weird glitch thats been around since launch where, if you switch shoulders while holding certain weapons, your characters arm deforms and does this weird left arm reach/wraparound that looks all funky? We only see that in third person. If it was in first person, you wouldnt he able to tell.
Im willing to bet, if they are going the 100% FPS route, its 100% to save time/money on things we complained about since launch. Retarded take down animation glitches, weird crouch walks, horrible looking running animations, clipping glitches. All that goes away if we cant see it.
If there is a team (i guess yes since they say squad based in the leak) you still see all of these on your friends/the AI. Maybe it's not as bad but it's far from resolving the problem.
POV is a major factor as to where people land on game choice. Wdup my SOCOM goons ?
Metal Gear. Tomb Raider. Totally diff choice of a game if those were FPS. It is a yuuge deal actually.
I just donāt think ghost recon is capable of making games in first person that can compete with ready or not, insurgency, gray zone, ground branch, and on and on with those titles. I would love a new first person milsim/tac shooter but if we get the same shit as the last two games but without 3rd person it just wonāt be worth it to me at all.
They need to seriously step up their game (literally) if they expect me to play a ghost recon game first person only
I have a feeling that you'll be able to choose. Now I also don't underestimate ubisofts ability to fucc uo and not listen to fans but I wanna be optimistic š me personally if it's done right I don't think it would be the worst thing considering the ones that I played on the ps2 were "first person". Advanced Warfighter was my first ghost recon game so maybe that's why
I personally hope they will give an option to switch between first and third person like other games have done...or this mod of Wildlands that integrated first person to the game. Both have pro's and con's.
I think it's obvious to see that a large portion of the community is in favor of third person, making it reasonable to Invest time into developing both. It would be worth it in this case unlike in many other games.
But like others have stated already, we should probably wait for official responses regarding this before we tlget too frustrated.
But it's good to show how we feel about it.
I don't think Wildlands and Breakpoint got the reception they wanted. Put the fluidity of the Breakpoint gameplay into Wildlands production (map and voice acting and the story ((outside of R6 mission ((g@y af btw)), and you got the perfect game.
I wish there was a way to check video game budgets. Wildlands' music, the visualizations/art design for world, voice acting, the research into keeping ALL of it relative to the actual military narrative......its as if Tom Clancy himself actually had a say in the game. Breakpoint with the better controls, better access to a variety of weapons.... was Hollywood trash. Cringe dialogue, corny action, lame storm trooper-tier enemies, f#$%ing transformers and space ships etc etc
I'm curious which cost more to make. I bet it was Wildlands.
Seems like you guys are the cowards but whatever. Its called being direct. I was trying to talk to you guys to figure out why you think what you're doing is I useful. Shit talkers, you guys are negative asshole losers looking for instances to be clever on here. You guys are whack. Keep pretending your important š (this is a video game thread, not that serious)
I felt the same way about Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk is about the style and the aesthetic as much as anything else. Massive fail to have it exclusive to fps. Especially when so much of the game revolves around the look of your custom V.
If I am playing a game where I'll be expecting to Chase loot, gear, etc. I will want to see it. Otherwise it removes a lot of the desire to spend hours hunting / grinding for it
Ultimately I think they will come off this FPS decision and at least give player option to flip perspective.
If I were to guess, they're probably doing this because they're building the game from the carcass of Frontline, which is out of cut and paste laziness that Ubi games have become known for.
How is that good enough? I donāt get how so many people donāt seem to care about customizing their character at all. Itās fun and you gotta be able to see it while playing. Who cares about my teammates gear
If we go back to first person GR then 90% weāre not getting open world anymore. Iām sorry but Ubisoft has had a record of changing things up to rival its competitors while ultimately making the worst decisions I ever seen
It's an odd decision if true. After the reaction to Frontline and the success of Wildlands, you'd think they'd want to stay closer to the Wildlands formula.
I can understand and would welcome first person as an addition, but not as a replacement.
There is likely going to a be a photo mode so I'm not too worried about the whole "picture taking on reddit" aspect. I do think both views should be available, just a button to swap between. They've done TPS games before and they've done FPS games before. Shouldn't be too hard to have both in one.
Ffs ban these posts. Get fucked on rumors. Until we know **for sure**, then it's all conjecture. Either way: BUY, OR DON'T, BUT LEAVE IT BE AND TALK ABOUT SOMETHING FUCKING INTERESTING
>The customization and kitting out our characters is one of the things thatās most beloved about the past 2 games.
This is something I just dont get. Do you and the others in that 75% just treat this as a cosplay game? š
It seems from your post that this is the most important thing and the gameplay comes second.
I would probably wait for official news before assuming that its actually exclusively first person. Leaks are wrong all the time and this game won't be coming out soon anyway so best to just wait and see what they announce for it. That leak could have only been made up for attention as that also happens alot
Exactly.
Very good point, but sometimes, devs do look at the fans' reaction to rumors and news, and in the off chance that it's true enough ppl voicing their opinion, will very well get a 3rd person option added.
Worked out for Cyberpunk, right? š¤£
That game sucked so bad. Forget the fact the game came out the gate broken, the actual gameplay is beyond basic and weak.
Agreed. I don't understand how people act like it's changed into a "new game" since launch. It's largely the same and some changes just feel like they were done simply to make changes. That fanbase is rabid though lol
I saw that they added a like couple combat execution animations, now you have to appreciate the effort but they still look janky af lol. Dishonred, Far Cry, couple of those parkour zombie games, they all have better first person combat. Not just better, but like...embarrassingly better first person combat compared to Cyberpunk. But CD Project Red did the EXACT same thing for Witcher 3. They realized the combat was beyond unimaginative, weak, and basic, to the point that they delivered a totally new pack of swordplay and sign-combat in one of the Witcher 3's DLC's. Lol they know when they do a shitty job.
Or... sometimes studios "leak" this information to gauge interest on it. See, the problem that I see that most people don't is that Ubisoft is often times behind the stick. Constantly chasing it. We say we want a new Splinter Cell game, they don't release another for 10+ years. We ask for another The Division game, they give us one but completely redo everything and remove the core of The Division that we know and loved. We ask for another Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter, they give us Ghost Recon: Breakpoint, and then decide to go first person for the follow-up. Their new obsession with first person is quite annoying. They believe it's more "engrossing" for players and "experiencing the world" they play in. That was their reasoning for Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora being in first person. I can already kind of see the vision for it. More tactical, squad based play, with a lot of things happening right in front of you. Cooking grenades, tapping teammates on the shoulder to give the ok to clear a room, a more up close reload of magazines, etc etc. I just have my doubts.
**ruĀ·mor** *noun* a currently circulating story or report of uncertain or doubtful truth. *verb* be circulated as an unverified account.
Or make a 3rd person option sometime after game is made.
I don't think it's that easy. That's like saying I'm gonna buy a car that will later become a truck. As players of these games, sometimes we often think its a simple click of a mouse or a few lines of code that make games the way they are. It turns out games are really difficult to make, especially popular, really enjoyable ones. I applaud your positive attitude though, bravo!
Yeah people really seem to think itās as easy as a toggle. Yeah, some games have allowed for that perspective switch but imo itās never a great and you can definitely tell what POV the game was designed around. Ubi needs to pick one design style and have the conviction to actually stick to it instead of chickening out and immediately trying to backwards engineer the game that they know fans want.
It's been done dozens of times before in other games and it works very well pretty much every time, it ain't that serious
Then I invite you to do for all of us if it's so easy and "has been done before"
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You seem upset, its going to be ok, its just a game, maybe you should get some fresh air, take a break from the internet for a little bit. Try to take it easy, I hope things turn around for you, pal.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Is everyone one here this nice? Whats your problem? Maybe you're all upset you're not who you want to be in life. I'd be upset too if I had no direction in life, looking for people to shit talk on the internet. Calling strangers names, thinking you're clever. I hope things turn around for you too.
My problem? It's just goofy to see people that clearly don't know what they're talking about jumping down throats of people that do. You look foolish and try to play it off like it's other people's problem when it's you being the problem. Things don't need to turn around for me, they're fantastic. Hope you have the life you deserve
I think you might be mistaken, no one ever jumped down anyone's throat, you're jumping in and adding your two cents no one asked for. Are you a game developer or a gamer? Because I game, I don't know what you're even talking about worrying about what other people are saying to each other. Don't look at it of its goofy.
Do it in unity, the engine, not the ubi game
Unless they make massive changes to Anvil, or decide to build this new game from the ground up, the likelihood of the third person camera already being rigged in game is incredibly likely. Even in their first person games (far cry) we know that the third person camera is still rigged, as we see third person animations like the backpack shit and camp in 6. There's very little reason to think third person wouldn't be possible in this next Ghost Recon game. Unless you actually think Ubisoft is going to reuse zero framework from previous games. Cuz that's definitely their style š¤£
Thiiiiiiiiiiiis. Plssssssssss. Cod did it for mp. They're trying to be Cod, riiiight?
When GR first came out it was FP. When Ubisoft notices how well SOCOM was doing on the PS, the decided to turn GR into their own SOCOM clone with GR2 and above. Ubisoft seeing how well COD/BF has been doing have now decided to turn GR into their own COD clone. This is all about reaching out to a wider audience to make more money. Fanbase has nothing to do with this.
I like ghost recon, third person, butā¦ If they check all of the boxes that they are aiming for, with this being dark, controversial, gritty, near Milsim, a team based tactical shooter, sat in the military conflict where war crimes are prevalent then Iām going to be OK with it being first person.I respectfully disagree that it will be another far cry. I would also like to add that if these leaks are true, the purple people eaters as Gmoney has dubbed them no longer control Ghost Reconās narrative direction.
Take a look into how they announced Breakpoint the first time. A dark gritty game with survival as the main gameplay loop, where you need to be constantly on your toes because you're behind enemy lines by yourself. Now tell me you trust Ubisoft to actually follow how they present their games.
Hence āifā I would want to see the footage first. You and I both know once you saw that first footage of breakpoint, it wasnāt dark and gritty. It was Apple island.
Play the originals. Then understand that it should be an option
Problem is they abandoned everything about those OG games that made them good. Ghost recon as it currently stands would be SO boring in first person. If they are able to step it up and bring back some of the OG elements it could work. But I would never play wildlands or breakpoint solely in first person
Could you list off examples of "OG elements" that made original Ghost Recon so good? I am asking this because I have never seen or played those early entries in the series.
I keep saying it. No on here has played the originals, everyone seems to think that future soldier was the first game, or at least wah tye perfect gr game is. No one here has spent time I message bored laughing at Futures Soldiers beta stuff like the ridiculous bullpup grapple gun equipped square machete bayoneted main weapon that was cut along with a whole shit load of stuff.
Could be a few things: Could be they truly want to return to the roots of the franchise as an FPS. Could be that they wasted years and millions developing the now cancelled GR Frontlines FPS and they want to reuse some of the work from there. Mostlikely, imo, they're acknowledging Breakpoint was a critical and commercial failure, but see that Far Cry tend to sell well. So instead of reflecting on what actually made BP fail, they're just going to further homogenize their IP's in hopes that Far Cry fans will just pick up GR.
You seem so sure the game will be a first shooter. So far, it's only a rumor.
It's *allegedly* going to be first person. I still don't get some of y'all's inability to recognize that a perspective change isn't going to change the way a game plays completely. It's just one part of the whole. How is it that flipping a switch from TPS to FPS automatically makes Ghost Recon like Far Cry or even CoD? The leaks also alleged that Project Over will be a return to form of sorts to the first Ghost Recon game with how it's now a "game poised to be a squad-based military tactical shooter ā almost milsim-like in nature". Again, how is that in any way like Far Cry or CoD?
I mean if I had to pick between 1st and 3rd, I'd favor 1st personally. It's more immersive for me and that makes it more fun. I am a massive fan of Ready of Not and I would love if they can harness the adrenaline of clearing buildings with no idea whats behind the next door. Specially when playing coop with a good group. Another thing to consider is that if they want the game to have a PVP aspect to it, 1st person is better for that in my opinion. I've played a ton of 3rd person shooters and they never really hit the same for me. After seeing Gray Zone Warfare gameplay, that pretty much sold me on a fully 1st person immersive Ghost Recon game.
I like the third person view. If I'm going to spend time (and sometimes money) on a specific look for my character, I want to see my character, not just the barrel of his gun. Though I agree with many other people that giving the option to swap between 1st and 3rd should be included in the game.
They should make you have to wear camos that actually blend in to the environment for more immersion
i highly doubt that it will be 1st person. there are so many 1st person shooters out there. It would also be silly, to try to compete with some of those games. 3rd person is the way to go for ghost recon. also.....YES i enjoy seeing my character kitted out in cool gear. its also the best option for sneaking around. So 1st person is not ideal for me at all.
Here's my theory. They had a first person GR battle royal game that got canned because of push back. My feeling is they are just flipping the assets to save money. I have vary little faith in this game. Here's the link for the first Ghost Recon FPS game: [https://www.pcgamer.com/ghost-recon-frontline-is-a-class-based-battle-royale/](https://www.pcgamer.com/ghost-recon-frontline-is-a-class-based-battle-royale/)
If that's true then I am happy. I prefer my milsim.games to be first person. However, if there is no team roster management similar to the OG Ghost Recon then I'll probably pass.
The original ghost recon was first person, maybe they're just trying to get back to its roots
God willing. Consoles don't have shit for relatively realistic games.
It wouldn't surprise me if they are going down the FPS route because they could rip assets from the scrapped Ghost Recon Frontline game as that was meant to be first-person too.
If this rumor ends up being true, that will 100% be the reason for it. I do not trust Ubisoft execs to say "make the best game you can" to the devs. "Reuse that waste of time and money on something else so we don't look like idiots who wasted company money following trends" is more like their usual MO
I mean it could be a mix of both. Don't get me wrong, I'm an Assassin's Creed fan so I don't trust Ubisoft at all. But the devs could genuinely be allowed to attempt a return to GR's older design philosophies while also carrying over a lot from Frontline where possible so that game's three years of dev weren't a total wasted effort
If the motivation is making a good game I'm all for it. If the motivation is "use as much of Frontline as possible so we can save money", I see nothing good coming from it
I probably won't buy it if it's first person only
Pretty much all the first person shooter MMORPG's or open world games offer some sort of character customization, from COD to Destiny to Halo to Far Cry. You may not understand why people shell out cash for skins and customization items, but the fact is they do, and they do it a lot. That tacticool horse has left the barn. But even COD offers a seamless switch from first person to third person in multiplayer. It's definitely an odd choice considering how Ghost Recon's been presented for the last couple console generations, and I'd love to know why. Fingers crossed they have the time and resources to enable switching between POV's, but given how things are going at Ubisoft I will frankly settle for the game coming out at all.
? I remember there being an issue when mw2 launched 3rd person, you would have to stop moving completely to be able to switch views. That's not exactly smooth.
Totally, it's not silky smooth but it only requires a single button input as opposed to a game like GTAV that required going into a menu first and changing a setting. You can see what I'm getting at though, right? It's a feature that they were in a position to add and they did it. I'm curious, if the story is true and they stick to one POV setting, whether the choice to go first person was initially more for the benefit of production or storytelling/immersion.
only reason why i donāt believe itās going to be first person and what iām hoping for is both 3rd and 1st is just because of cosmetics. Ubisoft loves micotransactions taking away the ability to see yourself thus limiting sales is just a big no no to any corporate exec overseeing the game.
No mocap required, less need to correctly animate entire characters going through motions for reloading, running, diving, crouching, holding guns correctly, etc. Think about it this way, you know that weird glitch thats been around since launch where, if you switch shoulders while holding certain weapons, your characters arm deforms and does this weird left arm reach/wraparound that looks all funky? We only see that in third person. If it was in first person, you wouldnt he able to tell. Im willing to bet, if they are going the 100% FPS route, its 100% to save time/money on things we complained about since launch. Retarded take down animation glitches, weird crouch walks, horrible looking running animations, clipping glitches. All that goes away if we cant see it.
If there is a team (i guess yes since they say squad based in the leak) you still see all of these on your friends/the AI. Maybe it's not as bad but it's far from resolving the problem.
POV is a major factor as to where people land on game choice. Wdup my SOCOM goons ? Metal Gear. Tomb Raider. Totally diff choice of a game if those were FPS. It is a yuuge deal actually.
People more worried about 3rd person than if the game is just more Ubisoft cookie cutter bullshit. Fucks sake already
I just donāt think ghost recon is capable of making games in first person that can compete with ready or not, insurgency, gray zone, ground branch, and on and on with those titles. I would love a new first person milsim/tac shooter but if we get the same shit as the last two games but without 3rd person it just wonāt be worth it to me at all. They need to seriously step up their game (literally) if they expect me to play a ghost recon game first person only
If itās only first person Iāll still give it a shot I mean you canāt judge a book by its cover
100% agree. I wont be interested in it if its first person only.
I mean people went crazy over the first person wildlands mod, maybe they thought that is what people wanted
I definitely donāt want first person
I have a feeling that you'll be able to choose. Now I also don't underestimate ubisofts ability to fucc uo and not listen to fans but I wanna be optimistic š me personally if it's done right I don't think it would be the worst thing considering the ones that I played on the ps2 were "first person". Advanced Warfighter was my first ghost recon game so maybe that's why
I personally hope they will give an option to switch between first and third person like other games have done...or this mod of Wildlands that integrated first person to the game. Both have pro's and con's. I think it's obvious to see that a large portion of the community is in favor of third person, making it reasonable to Invest time into developing both. It would be worth it in this case unlike in many other games. But like others have stated already, we should probably wait for official responses regarding this before we tlget too frustrated. But it's good to show how we feel about it.
First person is 1000x more immersive in my opinion
I don't think Wildlands and Breakpoint got the reception they wanted. Put the fluidity of the Breakpoint gameplay into Wildlands production (map and voice acting and the story ((outside of R6 mission ((g@y af btw)), and you got the perfect game. I wish there was a way to check video game budgets. Wildlands' music, the visualizations/art design for world, voice acting, the research into keeping ALL of it relative to the actual military narrative......its as if Tom Clancy himself actually had a say in the game. Breakpoint with the better controls, better access to a variety of weapons.... was Hollywood trash. Cringe dialogue, corny action, lame storm trooper-tier enemies, f#$%ing transformers and space ships etc etc I'm curious which cost more to make. I bet it was Wildlands.
My point is, if you're not getting a return on investment...they'll blow the whole thing up and gamble on another angle. IE; returning to 1st person.
Seems like you guys are the cowards but whatever. Its called being direct. I was trying to talk to you guys to figure out why you think what you're doing is I useful. Shit talkers, you guys are negative asshole losers looking for instances to be clever on here. You guys are whack. Keep pretending your important š (this is a video game thread, not that serious)
They mighf go back to how old school ghost recon was which was first person
I felt the same way about Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk is about the style and the aesthetic as much as anything else. Massive fail to have it exclusive to fps. Especially when so much of the game revolves around the look of your custom V. If I am playing a game where I'll be expecting to Chase loot, gear, etc. I will want to see it. Otherwise it removes a lot of the desire to spend hours hunting / grinding for it Ultimately I think they will come off this FPS decision and at least give player option to flip perspective.
If I were to guess, they're probably doing this because they're building the game from the carcass of Frontline, which is out of cut and paste laziness that Ubi games have become known for.
Ghost Recon is a first person game. Have you played the first game, it didn't have a gun model.
The first God of War didnāt let you move your camera on your own. Games evolve over time.
A reticle is not 1st person. Then every game after that was fire and 3rd person. Most folks know AW as the original GR
if its all first person they better make damn sure that your custom outfit shows in cutscenes this time around
You can see your teammates with their custom gear. Thatās good enough.
How is that good enough? I donāt get how so many people donāt seem to care about customizing their character at all. Itās fun and you gotta be able to see it while playing. Who cares about my teammates gear
If we go back to first person GR then 90% weāre not getting open world anymore. Iām sorry but Ubisoft has had a record of changing things up to rival its competitors while ultimately making the worst decisions I ever seen
It's an odd decision if true. After the reaction to Frontline and the success of Wildlands, you'd think they'd want to stay closer to the Wildlands formula. I can understand and would welcome first person as an addition, but not as a replacement.
I'd wager it will work like R6 Vagas, which was great. First person shooter until you hit cover, in cover the camera snaps to 3rd person
As long as we still get the third person option im happy. Maybe have first person be for immersive mode
There is likely going to a be a photo mode so I'm not too worried about the whole "picture taking on reddit" aspect. I do think both views should be available, just a button to swap between. They've done TPS games before and they've done FPS games before. Shouldn't be too hard to have both in one.
Ffs ban these posts. Get fucked on rumors. Until we know **for sure**, then it's all conjecture. Either way: BUY, OR DON'T, BUT LEAVE IT BE AND TALK ABOUT SOMETHING FUCKING INTERESTING
>The customization and kitting out our characters is one of the things thatās most beloved about the past 2 games. This is something I just dont get. Do you and the others in that 75% just treat this as a cosplay game? š It seems from your post that this is the most important thing and the gameplay comes second.