For a tactical shooter the lack of detail or need for any tactical preparation is abysmal.

I've never played a Ghost Recon title before. For the past year or so I've been following all the news about this game. I was pretty excited, this was my game to buy in 2017. I had the chance to play the game at alpha stage and at the time I already had my very own concerns but it was too early, then I played the closed beta and now the open beta and I can honestly say that through all stages I've seen literal no improvements except from little tweaks and new assest. I am pretty disappointed with this game, disappointed with the only game I was going to buy in the first Q and that I was ready to drop over £100 for the collectors edition.

Don't get me wrong, this game can still be fun. A lot of unpolished games out there can still be fun. But for this price tag it would have to justify and it just doesn't it lacks detail, it lacks physics, it lacks good programming pratice and honeslty the only thing it should lack it doesn't (ammo crates everywhere).

If they had access to every other Ubi games assests, why was their choice so narrow then? And what's up with sniper's bullet travel speed being slower than that of an AR??

I honestly wasn't expecting a Division with cars as someone mentioned earlier but I was expecting this game to be at least as polished as the Division, as Watch Dogs 2 (I love the drone experience) and hell even far cry 4 open world feels a lot more immersive (does the GRW campaign even exist).

I'll put this purchase on hold for now, I already made my mind on what game to buy instead. Maybe in a couple months when its price tag matches it's level of detail then I might grab it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *