NEW INFO Ghost Recon LEAK Makes For HUGE Changes To The Franchise | My Opinion | Lets Discuss
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 มี.ค. 2024
- Join the Ghost Council: Become a channel member and get access to perks:
/ @gmoneymozart
Discord: / discord
Become a Patreon: / gmoneymozart
Donate on Paypal: www.paypal.me/gmoneymozart
/ gmoneymozart
/ gmoneymozart
/ gmoneymozart
#GhostRecon #FirstPerson - เกม
![[4K직캠] BABYMONSTER(베이비몬스터) - FOREVER](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/PS3UAFto1z8/mqdefault.jpg)
![ตีสิบเดย์ [FULL] | ครอบครัวสะท้านทุ่ง "นางบี & อ้ายสติ๊ก"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A1rhYcxxNtA/mqdefault.jpg)
![คุณอาเรียโต๊ะข้างๆ พูดรัสเซียหวานใส่ซะหัวใจจะวาย ตอนที่ 2 [ซับไทย] 【Ani-One Thailand】](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kbbfYakMY8k/mqdefault.jpg)
I hope they don't remove the third person mode, but I hope that adding first person as an option like the mods will be what they do. I like how the mod functions with letting go of the left trigger bringing the gun to a down position not just hip fire, and how you can swap shoulders, which I don't think I've seen in a first person game before.
Best move would be to allow toggle between the two.
They should be looking at games like old-school *Rainbow Six* and *Hidden and Dangerous 2* or maybe even *Door Kickers 2* for examples of mission-planning mechanics.
*Full Spectrum Warrior* , *SWAT 4* , *Ready Or Not* , *Brothers in Arms* and *Viet Cong* for squad-control inspiration.
I wish they would have 1st and 3rd
Would be sweet
That would be what a good AAA company would do. It existed in the first two RS game. It existed in 3 of the GR games. Ubisoft was good back then, though.
@@Go_CoupYes, that’s what a good company would do. So Ubisoft won’t be doing that.
@@justinschraeder8924Yeah…this sucks.
@@justinschraeder8924things is we already have seige ,cod, and wayyy other fps games out there , it’s look way too many fps games , and besides ion want to play pve in fps , fps is for PvP
Hoping for the possibility of being in 3rd person 🤞🏻
If the sniper elite series would come to modern day, they would literally be a surprise hit for third person fans.
I wouldn’t mind it at all
What’s the point of crafting your own badass looking character if you can only see his hands?!
Absolutely agreed on this one 😊
Whats the point in wearing backpacks and rigs that dont allow you to carry more equipment? GR was never about playing dressups, it was about tactical gameplay that required more than one brain cell.
You can play fallout or skyrim if you want to stare at the back of a characters head.
@@jeckek9936 if I want a good first person I play ready or not or Arma there are enough tactical first person shooter
I'm glad you called out the comparisons for what they are. I'm over reading about another "like Tarkov" mode from a AAA studio. Hazard Zone and DMZ were a predicable failures built on marketing hype and lies. You want to make Ready Or Not, EFT... etc. you better save your Lil Wayne advertising money and put it toward fleshed out game mechanics.
Lmfao 😂
Yeah bro, if this is only in 1st person then to me that's a big let down.
If they put it as an option then I'm cool w it but if not then that would really suck ass.
Hard to believe Ubisoft would give up on micro-transactions which is, imo, the main reason for them to have turned the GR series into a third-person ["squad-based"] shooter. Perhaps the studio will make the effort to give a player the option of whether to use FP or TP. But most importantly, proper command of your squad needs to return.
I don't think the micro-transactions are the reason given how the series has been third person since the Advanced Warfighter games, but they're definitely an incentive to keep the games third person.
Personally, even though my favourite is one of the third person games (Future Soldier, the goat imo) I do like the OG first person games and I wouldn't mind a return to that kind of gameplay. I definitely agree about commanding your squad though, I really hope that makes a comeback.
On the PC, which I use, Advanced Warfighter series had first person. However, regardless of one's platform, in those days AFAIA micro-transactions weren't really part of the marketing strategy for video-gaming to increase revenue. Given Future Soldier didn't have micro-transactions, IIRC and was indeed third person, I think I should have phrased it as "... for them to continue the GR series as a third person ..."
I also prefer the FP view over TP for a shooter, and can only hope the studio learns from the negative feedback it received from Wildlands and Breakpoint as it related to the lack of meaningful control of your AI squad. That will be deciding factor for me, regardless of FP or TP.
Was hoping it's first and 3rd mixed, well what ever. Not sure how I feel about it man.
Me too. I thought for sure that would be the best way to evolve the series
I don't understand why to lock a prospective to 1st person these days. Add 3rd and 1st prospective.
Prob less time to develop things.
@@GmoneyMozart And that's the problem they keep doing with all their games. Not taking that extra time and effort to polish it.
Agreed
Both would be good
If that is true, it is BYEBYE from me.
Same.
Bro I wish that green screen behind you was really just a huge poster for Back to the Wildlands 😂
Haha nice
Why not having BOTH DAMN VIEWS so everyone shuts the fk up about it and stop complaining about one view or the other🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
Like many other, I've been interested in having both FP and TP options but IF we can only have one option, it NEEDS to remain a third-person perspective imo.
I think Ubi is making a BIG BIG mistake with this decision and again, just chasing trends and going where the money is.
Ubisoft themselves said they made Avatar a FP simply because it immersed you in the world much better. Their opinion, not mine.
I'm intrigued but also disappointed.
They choose FPS just like every other company does because it’s lazy. They won’t have to animate a sprite on screen. They saw the success of the recent Robocop game and how people just accepted that you can’t see him in action, just his hand and gun like COD. What’s the effing point of making a Robocop game where you can only see him in cutscenes you can’t control? I might as well watch the films and television series for all that. LMFAO. But, the real reason IMHO is they’re trying desperately to get that COD fanbase with their Ghost War mode which will be the files they saved from Frontlines. I’m convinced that just like the horrible MCU writers, they don’t like Ghost Recon and are not only chasing trends, but promoting whatever else has nothing to do with Ghost Recon. Pitiful. 🤦🏾♂️🤡😭
The simple answer is that 3rd person lovers like to see the equipment!
I believe there’s only one way to satisfy a 3rd person lover with 1st person…
Reflections and mirrors! Lots of them! And probably couple this with VR also. If people can see their equipment on reflections it will not only fill the 3rd person gap but it will also add immersion.
But we all know how expensive reflections and/or Ray-Tracing is. No way we have the hardware for a bunch of this at the current time., especially consoles, and even less with VR when it hasn’t even become main stream yet.
But think about the diversity of reflections we could have to see our equipment for a sec…
Water puddles, mirrors, watch and tablets, vehicle and house windows, selfies, our partner’s goggles, etc.
But this won’t happen, like I said. It’s too expensive for consoles and even PCs. Unless there’s a cheap reflections technology that we haven’t seen yet.
It’s not necessarily about seeing equipment but I ain’t going lie that third person is freakin cool to play in and sort of takes away from actual 1:1 real life immersion but idc I still really love third person and can still be tactical and fun for all of us especially if they give us host parameters and restrictions maybe you want set up server that’s 1st person only or third only or both 3rd/1st server this would be helpful because I’m not really bias towards either perspective I see the perks in both. Third person is just easier on the eyes too and being able to kick back and over view the battle while still be able to fight like have you ever played 1st person for a long periods of time and need to stop because your eyes are tired of being in 1st person fov box but you still want to game which is why GR needs to have both 3rd/1st because you’d have the best of both worlds it’ll just take a lot more work still possible and reasonable to bring in third person audiences like the fallout, gear of war and saints row audiences who enjoy third person it’s more money for Ubisoft that’s a reasonable upgrade to gameplay. As for reflections that would be dope asf tbh like more mirrors we can see ourselves but like you said is it even possible w the technology and is Ubi even willing to put that much effort into innovation. I really hope that we all can enjoy this new game. Good day to you ghost.
Well, GR it's literally just Farcry now that it's in first. Everything Ubi makes now is either Assassins or Farcry.
The setting also sounds more like a Farcry game than a serious tac shooter. Not against FPS GR, but defo against another Farcry with the name of GR.
hopefully its an immersive first person and not a casual shooter first person
We’ll see bro.
Hopefully there’s both a FPS and TPS option or mode.
Better not be a far cry clone
@@ZePacifistait will be they like to copy and paste
Hell no bring back 3rd person
Seeing how many mods make 1st person work after the fact I honestly feel like both 1st and 3rd person should be baked into the game by default. If a modded can do it then a professional studio with a massive budget can
I've always been a FP tactical gamer, simply because i'm convinced that the real tactics apply on a perspective from which you DON'T have a 'god's eye' of the battlefield. I've always played OG GR up to GRAW but totally disregarded the new ones with the 3rd person view.
Couldn't take them seriously.
BUT... the FP mod got released. And oh boy. what awesome games they became.
My point is: A MOD has shown us that making a game joining BOTH perspectives is not only viable but also very attractive to gamers.
Each of the crowds can have their fun, you please BOTH of them and you make one appreciate the other, like i did after playing some of it in 3rd person too. It is a win-win situation.
I cannot understand why Ubiflop isn't going for it.
Ya I think for ghost recon the “gods eye view” along with the OG cover based system is what made it stand out. Providing the player the ability to command troops and move around and shoot precisely along with the play style excelled in 3rd. And as a 3rd person fan, this is what I’m accustomed to and enjoy about the series. But after the mods I don’t know why the team didn’t think to implement both views. At this point you have to just assume they want to reach a different player base.
Pretty ironic I see everyone loving and eating up the first person mod and talking about how great it is all the time but Ubisoft finally gravitates towards something people like and then everyone is in an uproar. I understand the blow back but FPS is far more realistic for tactical realism imo anyway. If they do it right it could be amazing.
First person done right could definitely be badass but then you exclude a lot of the fan base who only played WL and BP for 3rd person and did like to see the ghost. It’s better to have both too so you ease 3rd person players into 1st person perspective sort of like a drug. At this point in innovation Ubisoft should have both perspectives dialed in with quality animations/cutscenes for both view points. Add peripherals to 1st too and we’d have a blast in first person. I just can’t understand why Ubisoft won’t innovate further w both perspectives just do both and make every one stfu already. I’d rather wait for a polished game like look at the come back ea dice had w battlefront 2 and this game had both 1st /3rd and the animations were cool but bf2 is still good just has little content compared to og bf2 but completely different games just saying why is adding two perspective so hard ofc more work but that’s what ghost recon needs. Ubi need to have the right resources and it’ll take money to make money so they need to step up already. If not then let it cook for years. Take it easy fellow ghost.
I generally never watch content creators that comment on leaks and rumors/speculation. Half the time they're incorrect, and the other half the time, they don't care about their fans, just their views and they're milking their attention for what it's worth. But I have a lot of respect for your content.
Wasn't there a wildly popular first person mod for Breakpoint and Wildlands, that was well received by the community??? If this is true (which I doubt) maybe that's where they got the idea. I find the part where 3rd person kinda fails is interiors. The camera loves to glitch out and be garbage once you enter a building, and are going room to room. Perhaps they are planning to have more action inside buildings and such. But I think it would be better to have a transitional system, where they transition from 3rd to 1st person when entering a building/structure.
This extremely disappointing news if true. No 3rd person option equals no purchase for me. Ubisoft has been tanking it hard lately. I used to look forward to what they had coming out. Now it's what disaster are they going to release next?
Ya if you’re a fan of third person games then this is pretty bad news.
💯👏🏾🎯
Awesome video G! It should have both of them in the game. Well see how this plays out.
Ya too bad we will have another fps now. Sucks imo. I’m not really excited.
It could still change if enough people complain about it. Always a possibility. @@GmoneyMozart
@@edde333Let’s sign a petition/pledge to boycott this game if it’s just FPS. Hit em in their wallets and see how they scramble to make the game we want.
@@trealsteve No problem. Send me the link to it. I am in the discord. 🙏🏻
I'm happy they bring back 1st person but i'm scared when they mention call of duty =x
I don't think they will give the player the possibilty to switch between 1st and 3rd person but if they do it will be awesome.
I play both FPS and TPS so for me it's not a big deal. However, if they want to sell skin it is better to have a 3rd person game ? (from their perspective)
If they add team management, a tactical dimension with a system of order I think the game can really stand out.
After the "slippage" of Breakpoint before they introduce the Ghost experience (immersive mode), I really hope that they will make a very polished game
A special thanks goes out to Gmoney, as Ubi would have never made this decision without him showing off the first-person mod. As I splash in the tears of people who don't actually play tactical shooters (first-person games), I will try to not get you wet. It's great that Ghost Recon is going back to being a Ghost Recon game again.
On a serious note, I still don't think it will be a tactical shooter, even if they make it first-person again (as it should be.)
Oh, come on! There's no way that you think third-person is better for a tactical shooter. You can't even see the people inside of the room because the camera is 10m behind you. You have to switch to a first-person view to make accurate shots (when the game isn't as simple as aim and click.) You need control of the avatar in a tactical shooter, and third-person doesn't offer enough control (especially not without keys for turning the avatar.)
I am not hyped for a first-person (or third-person) Ubisoft game. If they somehow make it feel like GR01, like a mix between Black One Blood Brothers and Door Kickers 2 and Ground Branch, I will be excited to play it. However, I do not see that happening. I see it being Wildlands but in first-person and not even the first-person mod in which you can see your body as it exists in the world.
For an FPS there would be no real reason for cosmetics. I can $ee them giving up that chunk of cash.
It’s also lazy game design.
Broooo they don’t care about the community or their consumers feelings they’re just following the money they really have a chance here to solidify their brand with a brand new 3rd shooter with all the feed back over these years NOBODY ASK FOR THIS.. that could’ve had an option for FPS..you have new FPS shooters like Grey Zone and Delta force coming don’t forget about the ones already exist like MW3 ready or not and so on.. they are just chasing the money not what this GR community’s wants it sad man 🤦🏽♂️
Wildlands was the last game ever released..
That wasn't infected by the poisonous nature of corporate ideology..
The gaming industry is finished for reasoning adults..
Agreed
Hey bud. I agree with everything you've said. But what if they give you an option of switching between First Person and Third Person?
That would be the obvious choice.
@Go_Coup you'd think that. But with AAA games being embarrassed by indie games as of late you never know. 🤔
Prob development costs
Man if this game turns out to be a first person shooter only I will not be picking it up. Ghost recon was one of the only games that kept the 3rd person identity it is what separates it from all the other 1st person shooters that are out there. In my opinion it’s just stupid but I have only been playing games my whole life so what do I know.
👏🏾
If you put the two new pieces of info together it paints the picture that mission scenarios might *require* the first person pov, which you could see with a bomb baby moment of indecision. Third person would be harder to pull off these type of scenarios. It suggests the way the player will be engaged will be on a smaller, more controlled scale that 1st supports. The problem obviously is that if this is true, it’s not about strategy, positioning and tactics as much as individual decisions, which isn’t GR. I could be wrong! They should ultimately just make it both and let the player decide how they want to play.
We’ll see. Cyberpunk said that was the case and I still think that game could have been 3rd person gameplay.
if they wanted to play it safe they could had have to so player can choose 1st or 3rd person views. if this one open world i hope it a more active almost like ARMA series.. like being stealthy but do want have moment where need to run away
ArmA 3's campaign isn't open-world. It has an open-world mode, and that's what GR should do: open-level missions for the campaign and an open-world mode for goofing around.
mean when you walk around on your way to a base.. GR wildland and breakpoint there just random units doing standing around, on a set patrol path or driving.. not looking for you Arma they are looking for you.. just want GR to be a lil more active
@@TheJayKS , okay. Ubisoft's open worlds are definitely too static. It doesn't feel realistic at all, for the majority of the time.
Adding a first person mode to a third person mode would have been a great move. This seems like an unnecessary risk to the success of the franchise.
From what we heard here everything else seem solid, the only problem would be the FPS thing. To anyone outside the fanbase, it might not be a huge deal, but to the community it's a deal breaker.
I love the gritty tone that the franchise is heading towards and I know that the roots are FPS, but the modern identity of GR is TPS. Hopefully it's a toggleable instead of FPS only.
I’ve played Ghost Recon since the very first game. I couldn’t be happier than to hear it’s going to first person. I don’t equate 3rd person and hard core. I feel the game will now finally going to a more hard core gameplay. I don’t hate 3rd person but I do think of it as arcade and a lesser experience.
WTF nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YESSSS
@@Fedrix1409FUCK NO!
I'm really hoping they go with a toggle for the camera as well. Ubisoft needs to stop trying be everyone else and focus on what makes their games unique. As long as they continue to run unopposed, a 3rd-Person tactical shooter is still a unique concept.
I don’t care if it’s a 1st person but give us the option of also playing in 3rd 😐
Why is this sad background music playing, director, is this the end? Funeral
Lol
In fact, third person is fun but not realistic nor tactical, it’s just “tacticool “.
So, this change is ok for me, the main point we need to focus on is the core mechanic, hope it can be a next gen “ raven shield” .
to be fair i grew up with the first person Tom Clancy games so yes a return to the roots of the franchise would be great but they should keep the third person cover mechanic like they had in rainbow six vegas
Welp, you know it's a pass for me! I swear Ubisoft just doesnt listen to their fan base at all! For every step forward they take 5 steps back! Just when you think they are on the right path after Motherland and they implemented the type of gameplay and mechanics we wanted, then they tried that silly FPS Heartland that got canceled as soon as the trailer came out, but they double down 🤦🏽♂️
the first person only was one of my many criticisms about ghost recon frontlines and we see what happened with that title I hope that won't happen here with the next title
Ah that is disappointing! Why can't they add both perspectives, baffles me. I do think that they may have recycled the Frontline game and just changed it to single player with co-op. Just a thought mind you.
That's what I was thinking.
This. They’re incredibly lazy of this is true.
For me, I am a fan of the original ghost recon games when it was first person. I will still buy third but prefer first. So I'm very happy! Also you can have both third and first person but you have to choose one view that your gonna balance for. Level and enemy design I do believe changes depending on the view.
Yeah I agree
First person sounds great. I hope there is a toggle between the two perspectives, but I would much rather have it in 1st person.
First person is not the way!! That market is over saturated. Wtf is Ubisoft thinking. Only way this works, if you can switch between 3rd and First. Otherwise is a hard pass for me!!
I remember that we filled out a questionnaire, a long time ago we asked what we would like, they put your wish list on the wall in the office, unfortunately the top bosses did not look at it, why not a free choice between Trid person and first person, we already have so many first person games, they no longer think about the players all to make a profit, now I know why the new Ghost recon is called Over, the game is over.
100% absolutely agreed with this comment
Ghost Recon started off as a third-person game. They are going back to that era play. I played ghost recon since day one.
My God ….😢!! Well … they kicked me out!! 3rd person ALL THE WAY!! I don’t know what is this but … sad news for me !
Another Cookie Cutter job by Ubisoft....amazing
Another first person game for the industry…🤷🏻♂️
@@GmoneyMozart I saw your video the other about third person and first person, and I agree with you.
Immersion does not necessarily mean first person
Being able to see your character and around you let's you have a lot more visual immersion since you have a better understanding of your surroundings, also seeing your characters outfit and the way movement it flowing
Granted though that ghost recon first came out in first person....but it matured kind of alright in third....so third person should stay
I stopped playing Ghost Recon when it stopped being Ghost Recon, and I stopped playing Rainbow Six when it stopped being Rainbow Six. I was one of the complainers being told to stop being vocal about Ghost Recon going third-person. I wish studios would just make new IPs for games that completely deviate from a game's historical design. Making a side-scrolling beat 'em up and calling it Ghost Recon: Fight To Survive, just makes no sense to me. They'd do better just calling it Soldier's Fight or something to that effect, but they're always so desperate to use brand recognition in hopes of scoring a few more sells.
At this point, I wish they'd just make a new IP for the first-person project and hell go ahead and slap "Tom Clancy's" on the front of it if you're looking to score familiarity points. Changing what has been going over for over a decade at this point just seems like a gross oversight to me.
Henderson better be trolling. Awful news if it’s true
Ya…tough
The only thing that makes ghost recon different in comparison to the 34685 fps of the market is that it is in 3rd person. Making gr just another fps would be tantamount to killing the franchise forever.
This.
Exactly
I'm a bit of a ghost recon boomer so the perspective doesn't bother me too much but I mean there has basically been only one mainline game that was in first person. I would have preferred 1st and 3rd person like ARMA. If anything I just want better tactical gameplay and more immersive mechanics like would treatment, weapon modding, stealth mechanics etc.
First Person ? Did they listen to the community for the franchise ?? Was the difference between 1st & 3rd person in the Top 10 things we complained about ?! 25% Hope in the franchise now down to 5%; for me
I'm not mad... just disappointed
Polling people who are playing a third-person game is not a strong way to gauge whether people want a first-person game, and it's certainly not a way to decide if it's what's best for the gameplay. Tactical gameplay requires precise controls, and that's where first-person shines. It's not about pretty animations and high-fidelity graphics. Sound design doesn't even work properly in third-person. Should it be based on the avatar or the camera?
@@Go_Coup🧢
@@trealsteve , where? Use your language to form a cohesive and logical argument.
We love this game because its third person with good animations like you Said , they dont respect us , they didnt make frontline because community want third person and now they make the same mistake .
Third person shooters just doesn't hit the same as a first person shooters.
Something about the way you simulate the recoil of the gun only work in first person.
Also the handling of the weapon just feels more intimate when it is in first person. Especially when you have a lot of modification to the weapons - you feel the differences a lot easier on first person.
In 3rd person shooter it doesn't feel like it is me who is shooting rather than me telling my character to shoot.
The aiming through different optics in third person shooter doesn't feel as good. like they didn't put much effort into making the optics feel right visually.
When it comes to military shooters or tactical shooters it just works better in first person.
So my initial response was severe disappointment. However, I MIGHT be coming around to the idea. I think I'm going to play some old Ghost Recon to get me back in the First Person mode. If they do it right, I may be accepting of it, but it is kinda crazy they are getting rid of the 3rd person all together. We'll have to wait and see.
I still feel first person part is fake . I still believe ubi still keep their third person hopefully ubi forward will show case
They may have leaked that to test the waters and see if they can get away with lazy FPS game design. I hope we all show our displeasure enough that they keep it TPS or add FPS option or mode.
A mysterious comment made by John Linneman on Digital foundries new video on GRAW.
"I have a feeling that they(ubisoft) may have some ghost recon ideas up their sleeve hint hint wink wink"
What could he know? 🤔
that's bad and sad news.... it's kinda throw one of the big uniqueness overboard and as you mentioned, just doing another fpp...
I guess there will then need to be a fix as the immersive mode they had to fix Break Point... Make it 3rd person as main game and add a fpp option.... Ubi messing it up again.... if they really go 100% fpp they finally lost me as long time Ghost Recon dude...
"Longtime Ghost Recon dude..." Well, it can't be that long, as the first game was first-person-only.
Same here.
Like I said on ASQD comments I’ve got a funny feeling they are just going to throw ghost recon paint on Far cry, if this is the case it’s just going tho be s**t, another ubiflop
Lazy FPS game design.
Wish someone at Ubisoft realizes that breakpoint didn't fail because it was 3rd person and had poor animations. quite the opposite i felt breakpoint was the smoothest feeling up to this point. breakpoint failed because of the world that felt like it had no life to it whereas wildlands did. the storyline was boring at best, and me personally my immersion was consistently broken by drone and drone/tank warfare. weapon modding felt dull.
Who knows maybe making it 1st person is just an asset flip from Frontline cancellation
If it’s first person. It better be unbelievable, cuz anything less than that I’m not buying it bro…
Ghost recon FRONTLINE part 2 WTF 🤔 ?????
Extremely depressing and devastating news. Any suggestions on what to do now for a third-person tactical shooter lover who's only on console. This is really a sad day for me.🥺😢😭
There are none unfortunately
This will end the third person tac shooter genre as we know it especially for console gamers. You will have to wait for action adventure games like TLOU or the new Bond game IO interactive is making. Things like that.
@@ASQDGAMING I know Bro
@@GmoneyMozart 😥
@@ASQDGAMINGDammit.
Here is a joke: the first person mods influenced their decision for going first person.
If this is true though, I'm indifferent as long as there are actual mechanics and systems that turn it into a tactical squad based shooter. RTS elements and individual controls etc.
I agree with you
We’ll see.
This will likely kill the series. It's such a shame.
We've waited for years for a quality game to follow up Breakpoint. Wildlands and Breakpoint open world third person shooters were you can customize your character and weapon and see everything.
Nobody is thrilled to only see the top rail of a rifle, and none of the characters that are supposed to be highly customizable. Nobody is thrilled to have another first person shooter to join COD and Modern Warfare.
Ubisoft tried it with Frontline, and the community let them know that wasn't the Ghost Recon experience we're looking for.
I'm sure it's not the devs but the higher ups who want to ride the wave of a trend of first person shooters, attempting to gain a new audience; at the expense of Ghost Recon's core audience. Ubisoft pushed Ghost Recon to the back burner for other titles they felt would bring in a higher profit margin.
Ubisoft CEO is thinking profit, the community wants a highly detailed third person shooter to follow up Wildlands and Breakpoint. It would appear that Ubisoft's CEO doesn't align with what gamers have provided copious amounts details about, and so this may be the death of the Ghost Recon franchise. Ubisoft needs to learn.
Well said sir absolutely 100% agree on this one
If there is no Third Person, then it is a "No €70 Buy" from me. Maybe when the €5,- sale hits Steam. There is enough FPS Tactical stuff out there. I rather play Wildlands again.
They could be the spearhead in the TPV/Tactical Barbie Genre, but they go for the cheap and easy FPV path, not as 1st, 2nd, 3rd but the umpteenth game to walk that path.
On Console (Sony) and PC there may be a SOCOM reboot from Guerilla which will be probably Third Person. This may bar the TPV/Tactical market space for a later reentering of the Ghost Recon Franchise for Ubisoft.
Wildlands 2 = License for Ubisoft to print money
I am seeing videos of youtubers who rarely talk about ghost recon tryin to say that 1st person is the way to go. WTF? Bigfry and willyb just droppes videos recently. I get some people want it but just because its what it started as, doesnt mean its the right way to go now.
It’s not. Those people are wrong imo
They need to listen to he fans if they really want to make money from this game. Instead of just having the 1st person put 1st and 3rd keeps everyone happy
Absolutely
I’ll still try this new GR out no matter what but if it’s only first it’s probably not going to have a lot players because like you said you’ll exclude those who only played for 3rd but a lot of us were hoping for both 3rd and 1st to actually innovate GRs gameplay it’s just the obvious choice. The devs need to go the distance and actually put effort into this innovation. No bs this time Ubi like Battlefront 2 has 1st/3rd feature for years why can’t Ghost Recon.
It’ll have a lot of COD players for about two to three weeks until they realize it’s not COD and then this game will be blacklisted in a year due to low sales, players, and bad reviews comparing it to aforementioned COD. 🤣
@@trealsteveYeah that’s thing if GR goes only first then they’d really have to compete with other fps titles that have pretty darn good fps animations which idk if ubi is capable of but I would prefer both 1st/3rd w quality animations but the main focus for GR “over” shouldn’t be about conforming to 1st person perspective but to provide us w the roots of made ghost recon from the beginning w micromanaging. Ubi lost there way a long time ago and introduced an arcade style game like WL and BP but still can be played tactical w friends not Ai mates, the game loop is not as detailed when you don’t have micromanaging. Like I grew up on Desert Storm, COD BRO/FH, Brothers in Arms, Socom, All the Ghost Recons but I’m more familiar w Jungle Storm because of how long it’s been but I remember playing 1 and 2 w friend all the time on either PS or Xbox because my friend had both systems we played all the time and majority of these games had one feature in common which is micromanaging each character much like todays Enlisted game except not every feature was similar to Enlisted. Ghost Recon has been missing micromanaging as core identity for a long time. Micromanaging is what makes Ghost Recon a unique tactical experience especially if your playing alone single player like WL and BP doesn’t have this experience. Micromanaging made the single player experience more interesting by allowing us to utilize the whole squad and that meant every weapon too. That’s why it’s hard for me to play breakpoint and wild lands alone for a long time or else I get bored. I was so comfortable to that old way of playing ghost recon and why I can’t really consider WL and BP as tactical because you can’t micromanage anything it’s only hold here, open fire, go to, follow me which doesn’t offer that much. WL and BP are only interesting w friends pretty much which still can be played tactically just not with Ai team mates precisely because Ubisoft hasn’t innovated teammates further like we should be able to break our team down into groups or merge or be able to command one guy to hold as over watch for long periods of time. For example if I’m scouting a compound I would like to have some guys hold and stay there forever if I need that much time and be able to then switch back to one of the guys who is holding way in the back so I set up like an overwatch team for the other guy near the compound for supporting fire. The 3rd guy I didn’t mention if it’s 4 man team should either be with the 1 compound guy or back with the other 2 overwatch or doing something else like in a vehicle planting mine, etc whatever the situation. Sometimes the missions doesn’t always need big groups but I still want teams ready on standby incase my infiltration goes poorly and I have to open up which the enemy may call in reinforcements similar to WL aggressive alert system. Ghost Recon should have a whole force list of different teams and units similar to Enlisted but Ghost Recon verse where we can go and customize our units combat outfits either making them more heavy armored or light weight or median or middle armored. Weight should be gained by what guns and equipment we use or take. Armor should wear down over time too this should be where some looting comes in to play or you may have to head back to a fob, bivouac, or whatever to reequip armor plates especially if this game is open world it’ll need a detailed tactical game loop that not only has tactical missions but tactical features. I have always wanted the ghosts to have legitimate force in a ghost recon game on a map together as one at our disposal or a simplified version where we choose which squads to bring out. For example let the players choose units that would consist certain amount of ghosts that can operate differently like one unit is 4 man armored tank, another unit is an 8 man attacker squad which can roll in as a convoy of any vehicles, another unit could be 4 man support fire team maybe more machine gunners in this ghost unit but don’t forget we should be able to do all the open world things too like get vehicles for anybody or leave the tank, then the last squad you’d maybe bring is like a signal ghost squad which can use artillery and all sorts of air support like I envision a ghost recon campaign similar to Enlisted but game mechanics definitely need way more command options and go command system to break down individual ghosts to get them to the right locations to either hold or provide covering fire, etc. and Ubi should be thinking about what the animations could be like for these combat situations getting reference from real operators. It’s really about bringing back the identity of classic ghost recon n creating a completely new experience using both 3rd/1st I’d love that especially if all animations were fluid gold. Another interesting idea for the next game is gas in vehicles which should be like another lootable type item like if Ubi is going to do looting then make the feature have an impact on our tactical movements in game if I need gas to get certain place then it’ll make the operation more interesting. Lets say I finished a mission but at the beginning gas was full but now you don’t have gas or it was shot or blown up and now you need gas for your vehicle, you start checking the area looking enemy vehicles or gas containers and maybe could have like mechanic and animation to siphon gas like if we have all these teams to micro manage it’ll make the player have a lot more challenge and risk beside the main objectives this all creates a game loop where the devs can fine tune certain things if they don’t work properly like gas maybe the mission keeps failing because it’s timed or you don’t use your gas properly like the devs would need to make features like this work according to the mission layout. I just think missions would be way more interesting in ghost recon if it entailed more survival features but the correct ones like BPs ration thing and Flower picking didn’t really matter because our weight always stayed the same no matter what your combat outfit is equipped like. I hope Ubisoft is listening because I really want to see them succeed this time around but they just need to listen to the right parts of the community like G and ASQD know the deal that’s the reason I follow them no doubt. Keep it tactical G and fellow ghosts.
I won't buy if it's first person
I feel you on that
If it’s not in third person view, no money from me!
Wether it’s first or third person really doesn’t bother me so long as the animations are high fidelity. Wildlands and breakpoint were serviceable but neither really hit that mark for me, they both had too many clunky/unrealistic animations (well showcased in many of the reload animations).
Though I would have preferred it to be third person with the ability to change to first, I’d take either.
The main issue is gameplay, and for that we’ll have to wait.
Ya well have to wait and see.
ghost recon island thunder was first person. I believe ghost recon should be 1st person only
Im pretty sure ghost island thunder was just a crosshair on the screen just like the original.
Hey g money tell Ubisoft to make third person I’m not on social media you have the power with your videos and comments let Ubisoft see them
I WANT THIRD PERSON
You got it
@@GmoneyMozart thank you get the message out tell Ubisoft or show them this video well done to your video all the points you made are correct
Third person for me but if they were clever they would do first and third and have a much higher rate of players
All the criticism of the new game maybe being a first person perspective game but haven't the FP mods in Wildlands proved extremely popular?
I could take any new game either third or first or even both ways if there's an option as long as the games not a piece of boring shite like Breakpoint.
Im addicted to wildlands and breakpoint now I don’t know if I want to play the new game at all
I was really excited now im truly pissed off 😡 first person what were you thinking 🤔
Yup
Yo bro do u mess with splinter cell??
Love splinter cell. You ever see my splinter cell gameplay movies I made in breakpoint?
th-cam.com/video/tesaQq2UQz0/w-d-xo.htmlsi=BXOkaa-8IaHk8ajQ
@@GmoneyMozart bout to check this out, I found u out from a live stream the other day.. u excited for the splinter cell remake?
Ghost recon use to be more about tactical squad command control and less about cosmetics and dress-up.
Those things are fun and they have their place but at this point a refresher is warranted.
Console players have been blue balled for a tactical fps since mw 2019 missions like clean house and wolves den and have been wanting a triple A tactical fps shooter. So far all we've got is insurgency sandstorm...
For once ghost recon has the ability to actually bring something new to the table for console players who want a tactical realistic fps if done right
This is true. We’ll see what happens.
🧢💩🤡
RIP ghost recon, that ruins it for me. 3rd person was what I was waiting for. Sucks
Hopefully - FINALLY - Ghost Recon back to first person again! The way that tactical shooters should be played for immersion and realism! Looking forward to this!
I get your point about the 3rd person perspective, but if they go with the more realistic-type of experience, I'd prefer by far having it set in 1st (if we can't have both). I've been playing Ready or Not recently and the feeling of a gritty first person is still (to me) an overall better immersion experience.
Using a combination of GR 2001's Tac-Map system and GRAW's quick orders system, Ubi could actually pull off the miracle!
Tbh I love 3rd person shooters, I've always been a certified sucker for Future Soldier, but to me FP view is still the way to go if you truly want to represent a realistic "You're surrounded by wolves" type of experience.
Cheers from Italy!
Yea I'll pass. Not going to say this will kill the franchise, but this decision has absolutely no reason to be in the game, and it most certainly will hurt their wallet. Everything you said is correct. My guess is this, they know this will pass alot of people off which will in turn start a "war" in the community, which inevitably leads to more and more controversy. Point being, I'm guessing this is just a PR stunt. Destiny, MW, and many other franchises have done this. Announce a bullshit "change" early on and then once enough eyes are on them, switch back and play the savior role.
Interesting take
About bloody time. It’s where the game started decades ago. I stopped playing back then after the switch to third person.
I dodn’t see why the same game can’t cater to both with a simple toggle.
Dude what??? I see what your saying but nobody wants to play this pve in fps only , you can literally play 1000s of other games with fps , ghost recon may have started as fps but they excel Ed as a tps , ghost recon is a pve series , every other shooter game is PvP , make it make sense
@@ypistolpete8315 Nothing to do with PvE or PvP. It’s about perspective. Third person is non immersive, arcadey and feels like any generic cover and shoot game. First person is immersive, non arcadey and feels only as good as the devs have made the gunplay.
@@JJ_KhailhaEveryone is entitled to their own opinion, but everything you say is exactly the opposite for me. 1st person is very non-immersive for me, because it looks ugly and stupid. I don't feel like i'm controlling a character, i feel like i'm just controlling the crosshair, the camera or the gun. There's no soul and personality, it's like i'm using the drone in Ghost Recon. It feels like i'm moving a small screen, and not moving the character itself. 1st person feels very arcadey to me because it's just 'point & click' like the Whack-A-Mole games where you're just whacking targets that pop up. Or like the old Time Crisis for PS1, or shooting ducks on Nintendo. You can't even take cover properly in 1st person, you can't see your legs, ass, back, shoulders.. You just see your hands and the gun. You can't see the animations, no customization and cosmetics, nothing.. 1st person is very generic and outdated, it looks exactly the same like every other fps game, you can't tell the difference between games anymore, they're all the same. Copy/paste mechanics that's been the same for the last 30 years. There is absolutely no difference between the old Call Of Duty 2 (2005) and the latest MW3 (2023), only the graphics changed. Even the animations developed minimally. It's just shinier and bigger resolution.
@@twentytwo138 TL;DR
Bad decision ... I think Grey zone warfare is going to take over first person
Huge error ignoring the community and going fps
out with the old and in with the new I guess
Yes totally agreed
OG GR was first person
OG GR was a crosshair.
we all want and waiting for a second Wildlands and they give us a CoD clone? that's a terrible decision!! i'm not that person who buys to fill up my steam library, i just buy what i like and play. and i dont play ego/war shooters. cp2077 is the only exception because it's a different type of game. UbiSoft is destroying the unique dna of the Ghost Recon franchise just for the love of money, ok then, so be it. i guess they are using the failed Breakpoint mp game as a starting point so it's possibly crap anyway.
If these rumors are true this sounds like a disaster incoming smh.
First person? How unfortunate
Prolly gonna see a third person mod 5 years after the game dies
No 3rd person no purchase for me
They will lose their butts on this game if they only go first person.